Centerfield

Disclosed Location

Now I find out where the Republicans were!

Throughout the convention, it was reported in the newspapers that a Republican quick response team was dishing out criticism at at undisclosed location a few blocks from the Democratic Convention. The reports avoided mentioning the location, presumably as a courtesy so they would not be besieged by protestors. However, the Congressional Quarterly give away, made available to conventioneers, did list the location. I didn't look at it till now. They were at 129 Portland Street. I'm sure they're not there now.

Healthcare specifics

Although Kerry's speech was well-received by many (including Pat Buchanan commenting on MSNBC!), I've read a number of posts and comments expressing disapointment over a lack of policy specifics. Although one could argue that Thursday's speech kept an appropriate emphasis on projecting an image rather than getting bogged down in policy details, I'll pass on that discussion. (Actually, if Kerry had dwelt on policy much, I can see the complaints about how he validated the media-approved idea that he's a boring speaker!)

Anyway, he does have policies that one can read. One that I'm pariticularly impressed with is Kerry's healtcare proposal here (PDF).

The part I really like concerns catestrophic illness, as explained in the Washington Post:

All it took was one cancer case and one chronic illness -- two employees out of 50 -- and the health insurance premiums of an Ohio faucet company jumped from $200,000 to $350,000 in a year.

Raymond Arth, who owns Phoenix Products in Avon Lake, Ohio, said he could not blame his insurer, Medical Mutual of Ohio, for the increase; for every $1 he had paid in premiums, the insurance company had paid out $2.08 in claims. Medical Mutual could not afford to take that kind of risk again and Arth could not afford the higher premium, so he went searching for a new policy.

Such catastrophic claims account for less than half of 1 percent of all claims but generate 20 percent of the nation's health care costs, according to the latest federal data. To cover those costs, insurers such as Medical Mutual boost premiums, often forcing companies and individuals to dig deeper in their pockets or go without care.

For more than a decade, the health care debate in America has focused on the millions of people without insurance. Now, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), in an unconventional twist for a Democrat, is focusing on the 162 million Americans who are purchasing insurance and what can be done to ease the double-digit premium increases paid by employers and their workers.

At the center of Kerry's ideas is his proposal to have the federal government reimburse employers 75 percent of medical bills over $50,000 that a worker runs up in a year. The reimbursement would, in effect, make the government a secondary insurer and ease costs for employers, workers and private insurers.

In exchange for the benefit, Kerry would require employers to offer insurance to every worker and to provide health programs that detect and manage chronic illnesses such as high blood pressure early enough to prevent the diseases from worsening.

Kerry's catastrophic-illness relief plan is the only new health care proposal -- and the most expensive -- of this campaign season. It marks the first time in 12 years that a political leader has attempted to reorient the insurance market away from dodging the costliest patients and in the direction of implementing higher quality of care.

I believe this is a good move because while leaving insurance in the hands of employers and insurers, it eases one of the biggest causes of increased costs. It's a great first step in that will benefit the middle class. And it's certainly business friendly.

I assume that one big objection will be whether this is an appropriate role for government. One other comment from the article:

It is not a new concept. Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard M. Nixon considered reinsurance pools for the most extreme medical cases. Today, the federal government serves as the ultimate reinsurer for natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

So this idea has been floated by administrations of both parties. I believe it is worthy of centrists' approval.

Swing Voters

Over at Daily Kos, DemFromCT has a post on swing voters.

On the lighter side (Vol. 11)

- Croatian MP caught with porn in parliament (here)
- Donkey Wins Colorado Mayoral Election (here)
- The infamous Kerry NASA photo (here)

NATO Agrees to Train Iraqi Forces

Read the MSNBC article here.

It looks like there are a lot of details that will need to be ironed out between now and the middle of September... It also appears that although this was a decision agreed upon by all 26 nations, France apparently is the only dissentor and has been brought along kicking and screaming like the self centered brats that they are... And you can quote me on that. I wonder when the rest of the world will get sick of a country that benefits from global cooperation, but is not willing to do any of the work.

So much for the President's inability to create international coalitions though, eh?

Hillary Clinton, Centrist Chameleon

So says the Village Voice.

With this all-but-conceded presidential ambition as backdrop, Clinton has certainly been much more of a centrist senator than her liberal New York constituency required. She may have been even more centrist than her local base would ordinarily tolerate, given a pass partly because of her aura as right-wing obsession and left-wing pioneer, and partly because of the promise of her grand White House return.

Open Thread

What's on your mind? Nothing is off-topic. Talk about Democrats, Republicans, football, movies, anything...

How Many Democrats For Bush Are There?

Historical footnote: the last boss of New York's storied Tammany Hall political machine has died at 95. He was dethroned by Ed Koch, whom the article notes is a Democrat for Bush, the only identifiable one aside from Zell Miller. Can you think of any other DFB's?

Delegate Families

Larry Kestenbaum, creator of the Political Graveyard, and candidate for County Clerk in the Ann Arbor region, has analyzed the delegate lists, and found nepotism.

Kerry's Speech -- One Reaction

As I watched the early part of John Kerry's speech last night, I was prepared to be impressed. He was doing a really good job of humanizing himself -- talking about his parents, his children, the things he learned growing up, the people who influenced him.

And he came across with that stuff. It felt sincere. I think it's quite possible for Kerry to do what Al Gore did not do in 2000 -- let people in, and give us a glimpse of his home life, what he's like in more relaxed moments, who he is as a person and not just a politician.

He did a nice job of opening up those possibilities for himself last night.

The rest, however -- most of it, at least -- did not impress me. He had some good moments, but he also took off in directions that underscore the difference between a centrist style of politics and a more liberal one.

The convention this year was clearly geared toward establishing national security credentials -- to building a sense of Kerry as a robust, forceful leader. The lead-in speeches were quite good on this point, including Max Cleland's, Wes Clark's, and Gen. Shalikashvili's.

But when Kerry arrived at that issue, he led rhetorically not with a statement of his own views -- his own policy proposals -- but rather with what amounts to a critique of the current administration:

Now I know that there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities, and I do, because some issues just aren't all that simple. Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn't make it so. Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn't make it so. And proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn't make it so.

As president, I will ask the hard questions and demand hard evidence. I will immediately reform the intelligence system so policy is guided by facts, and facts are never distorted by politics. And as president, I will bring back this nation's time-honored tradition: The United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to. That is the standard of our nation.

I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can't tell friend from foe. I know what they go through when they're out on patrol at night and they don't know what's coming around the next bend. I know what it's like to write letters home telling your family that everything's all right when you're just not sure that that's true.

As president, I will wage this war with the lessons I learned in war. Before you go to battle, you have to be able to look a parent in the eye and truthfully say: "I tried everything possible to avoid sending your son or daughter into harm's way. But we had no choice. We had to protect the American people, fundamental American values against a threat that was real and imminent." So lesson number one, this is the only justification for going to war.

And on my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: You will never be asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace.

He leads, basically, with a catalogue of the things the administration did wrong -- their claims about WMDs, the costs of the war, and the president's "mission accomplished" speech.

He continues with a declaration of the circumstances in which he will not go to war. And he takes four paragraphs to flesh out his thoughts about this -- the circumstances in which we will not go to war, including a heart-wrenching paragraph about the difficulties soldiers face during wartime.

Next, he considers what we should do today in Iraq:

I know what we have to do in Iraq. I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a president who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, reduce the risk to American soldiers. That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

Here is the reality: That won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership so we don't have to go it alone in the world.

And we need to rebuild our alliances, so we can get the terrorists before they get us.

He leads, essentially, with the observation that we need more cooperation from allies -- a more international approach. This is true, certainly, and I think most Americans see it that way. But the thing is, they know the Democrats believe that -- it's a given. They would be more impressed, I think, if Kerry led the discussion with muscular-sounding pronouncements about when he would use force. They would learn something from that -- e.g., that Kerry would use force if that were the best way to protect the American people.

Finally, he gets to the point of discussing when we should use force:

I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as president. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and a certain response. I will never give any nation or any institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger military. We will add 40,000 active duty troops - not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct antiterrorist operations. And we will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of the National Guard and reservists.

To all who serve in our armed forces today I say help is on the way.

The point about adding troops is a good one, and important, along with the point about not giving other nations veto power over our security. The rest is kind of off key. He seems to be saying he will use force when it's "required", which apparently means meeting "any attack" with "a swift and certain response".

That seems to take pre-emption off the table. And maybe, as a practical matter, we should not do more pre-emptive wars. But the threat of pre-emptive war is an important tool in any president's arsenal -- a way of pressuring rogue regimes to cooperate. It's hard for the president to credibly threaten use of force if he's espousing principles that say no use of force until somebody actually attacks us.

From this point in his speech, he goes on describe all the non-force elements that are important in a war against terror -- and they are important. But he basically gives up on filling in that one area where undecided Americans are likely to have doubts -- how comfortable he feels using force in the war on terror.

The rest of his speech is mixed. He makes some laudable points -- particularly about bringing the country together, and about the need for optimistic leadership.

But he also has that long segment where each line was punctuated by the line "Help is on the way", with the audience joining in. It was basically a long line of fairly biting riffs on the current administration:

You don't value families by kicking kids out of after-school programs and taking cops off the streets so that Enron can get another tax break.

You don't value families by denying real prescription-drug coverage to seniors so big drug companies can get another windfall profit.

You don't value families if you force them to take up a collection to buy body armor for a son or daughter in the service, if you deny veterans health care or if you tell middle-class families to wait for a tax cut so the wealthiest among us can get even more.

These lines were mostly too complex and rhetorically awkward to come across to mainstream audience watching on TV. And they also sound pretty sour. So the average, middle American voter doesn't quite know what you mean, except that you're attacking your opponent.

This was a mixed speech. But for me, it certainly didn't carry the sense of defining Kerry in the center. It suggests that he doesn't know how to grab the center. It's just not natural for him, even when he organizes his convention around that theme. Quite a few of his fellow convention speakers managed that kind of speech -- particularly Clinton and Obama -- but Kerry did not.

THANK YOU RICK!

Hurray for our man at the convention, for working hard on getting out his observations, and even sacrifcing his health on our behalf....

I think your choices on things to cover were pretty good. You're right - even when I've watched whole conventions on cable, I had little if any idea of all the events surrounding the convention, and I thought your line of inquiry was pretty interesting.

I vote we double his salary!

Proudly A Cyberhayseed

Charles Cooper of CNET slams convention bloggers, and particuarly a remark I made in one of my posts, quoting it out of context, and not linking to the full post so readers can determine it's value. Here is the comment I left at his site:

You took my remark, "Bill Clinton looks really small from the upper tiers of the Fleet Center." out of context too make me look stupid, and did not link to the post:

The point to readers is that they are not missing anything by watching this event on TV. In fact, given the distance and poor acoustics, the experience of watching speeches in person was inferior. Journalists who are making a living from covering this event have an incentive to hype their experience. In fact, I'm telling readers that it's nothing special.

Many readers were struck by my observation later in the post that some of the anchors were not paying attention to Clinton's speech. In a later post, I observed it was probably because they had received the embargoed text of the speech in advance, and had already read it. I was not aware that this was the way journalists work, and this was a revelation to my readers as well. If that makes me a "cyberhayseed" then fine--I've peeked behind the journalistic curtain, and clued all the other hayseeds out there into how the media goes about their work.

My post, which started with the "gem" you cited, concluded by observing that Clinton's speech represented a confident Democratic Party that was out but not down. It knew how to govern, and was a legitimate alternative to the administration in power. This theme which I picked up on anticipated the theme of Restoration identified in a piece in the Washington Post.

I stand by my post.

I would also add that I determined, based on my experience Monday night, that there was no value added in me covering convention speeches that viewers at home could evaluate just as well. As a result, I focused during the week on attending satellite events which most viewers will not have heard about, like the Red God, Blue God event or the People of Faith caucus luncheon. Did anyone hear those events mentioned on TV?

Update: CNET gave Dan Bricklin a shot to rebut Cooper.

Stamina

Don't these people sleep? Kerry and Edwards are dressed and making an appearance at 7:30 AM. Kerry's speech ended at 11PM last night, and there there were post-convention parties. I guess being nominated for President and VP gives you a blast of adrenaline.

McCain-Feingold, in Sheep's Clothing

Thus was the last pretense at campaign finance "reform" dumped into Boston Harbor. McCain-Feingold has proved more of an embarrassment than even its critics predicted, taking the "big money" that previously flowed to answerable politicians and neatly diverting it to unaccountable, shadowy groups, as well as stripping Americans of their free speech rights. But the farce hit an all-time low at the Democratic National Convention, where the groups that spent the past year quietly sidestepping the law felt confident enough of its loopholes to openly assume their place as the new fund-raising arm of the Democratic Party.

The Cash That Dare Not Speak His Name

Open Thread for Speeches

This is the place to comment on the speeches at the convention tonight.

John Kerry is coming up. Let's hear some chatter!

Photo Gallery

Taken on the floor of the convention. If I'm not mistaken, this is MSNBC's Campbell Brown


A wealth of buttons for sale.

From the press area near the floor of the convention.



View from Blogger Alley



Empty street near the Fleet Center



Another view of the same street





View from the Fleet Center, overlooking empty Interstate 93 and Charles River. Bunker Hill monument is to left. Masts of USS Constitution visible in center.

Politically-Balanced Conventions Aggregator

Democratic convention blogger Dowbrigade suggests keeping the ConventionBlogger aggregator running, and adding the blogs which are credentialed for the Republican convention. I like this idea. It would produce a politically-balanced aggregator, something like the Softpolitics aggregator which Centerfield has linked to in the left column.

Anarchist Photo Op

I don't really like giving publicity to the anarchists--they're a very small element here. But photos are seductive. I like this one. Notice Trinity Church reflected in the John Hancock Building in the background. The anarchist by the obelisk had his entire face covered.

Muslim Troops?

This is an excellent idea, and a very important time for it. The plan, apparently, is to draw a force from Muslim nations that aren't immediate neighbors of Iraq, and therefore lack the kind of history of conflict that could stoke suspicions. Countries being mentioned include Pakistan, Malaysia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Morocco.

The Saudis are taking direct responsibility for this proposal, but something tells me U.S. diplomacy is finally achieiving results. It's better to let the Saudis take credit for it, because it needs to seem like their choice instead of our request.

Remedial Blogging Through The Weekend

Even though the convention will be ending tonight, I will be posting convention-related material through the weekend. There are photos and stories that I haven't had time to get to yet. None of these are "scoops" of course; have there been any at the convention? In particular, the People Of Faith Caucus luncheon was extremely interesting, and I need some time to write it up at a leisurely pace.

So keep coming back to this site throughout the weekend--and throughout the election season. It looks like we won't be invited to cover the Republican convention, but from near or from far, we'll have plenty to say about it.

Rendell On The Democrat's Shift

The Command Post interviewed Gov. Rendell of Pennsylvania, and talked to him about the shift in the Democratic Party from liberalism to DLC centrism. Alan recorded the conversation and transcribed it, so it has a lot of nice detail.

Advice To A Republican Convention Blogger

Michele of A Small Victory will be blogging the Republican convention. She asks

What I'm wondering is this: What time do things usually get cranking during the day and what time do they wrap up at night? I'm thinking of not staying in the city at all, but going home to Long Island each night and coming back in the morning (I could also then have a blogger or two crash at my place with me, as long as you are relatively well behaved, clean cut and won't frighten my children and/or husband). So if I go home late at night, what's the general time I should expect to get back into Manhattan in the morning in order to not miss anything of relative importance?

The Democratic convention, which I've been blogging, has events scheduled from 7:30AM to 2:00AM. You have to miss something. What to miss depends on what your priorities are.

I've skipped the post-convention parties, which run from 11PM to 2AM. Those are networking events, but I've been able to meet the people I was particuarly interested in meeting at other events during daylight hours. I have missed out on meeting some celebrities, but c'est la vie.

I skipped the 7:30 AM breakfast meetings, which are only of interest if you are following a particular state delegation.

The events I've liked best are the caucus or interest group meetings which occur during the day, between 10AM and 4PM. These don't get much coverage in the news, but this is where you can meet the political operatives.

The speeches start at 4PM, but the important ones don't start until 9PM. So between 4PM and 7PM is a good time to rest up for a late night.

I figured out the first night that the speeches look the same in person as they do on TV, except the people are smaller, and the sound is distorted. What's fun is to wander around and talk to people--especially the journalists, both ones you've seen on TV and other working journalists whose names are not familiar. I've also chatted with delegates, but I've found that journalists are more articulate--not surprising considering their profession.

People will want to talk to you, and if there are people you've always wanted to talk to, you might try pre-arranging interviews. Take a digital camera and maybe even a tape recorder or binoculars. But don't overload yourself in the morning, because you'll be getting free stuff during the day.

Centerfield in KC Star

I spoke to Dan Rubin of the Philadelphia Inquirer on Sunday. He mentions Centerfield in a story which appeared in Knight-Ridder newspapers. The link I have is to the Kansas City Star (free registration required)

The Restoration

The Washington Post has an analysis arguing that Kerry is running not as a change agent, but for the return to the (successful) past of the 1990's. That should work for domestic issues, as long as he can convince voters he can handle the national security issues.

Les Bloggers

Dave Winer points to a story in a French magazine.

Autorisés pour la première fois à couvrir la convention du parti démocrate, les bloggers, ces journalistes et éditorialistes indépendants du web apportent une bouffée de fraicheur à un évènement des plus convenus.

Translation

Authorized for the first time to cover the Democratic Party convention, bloggers, those independent web journalists, bring a blast of freshness to a highly pre-arranged event.

Blog Flap

Since we bloggers are mostly amateurs, I figured we wouldn't be able to get through 4 days without a flap of one kind of another. Here it is (link may require free registration).

But in an interview, Schnure said dismissing Stoller as a DNCC blogger helped clarify that individual opinions do not represent the party’s views. "He wasn’t speaking on behalf of the DNCC," Schnure said.

Matt Stoller feels that the reporter has overdramatized the story--perhaps because there are few stories at this convention. Matt is a friend, and the post which got him in trouble seem so mild to me that I'm mystified. I suppose it's "off message" to say that he doesn't get Barack Obama's appeal (I do). But that doesn't even rate as criticism.

Update: The story has now gone Instapundit.

Talking Points

Angry Liberal sees Republican talking points filtering out into the mainstream media. But some things are obvious, like how the convention is stage-managed and scripted, that one doesn't have to get the phone call from the Republican National Comittee to observe it.

I don't see that any of these talking points have really scored. Teresa's sassay "shove-it" exclamation is nothing like Hillary's condescending "milk-and-cookies" quip from 12 years ago. Sharpton is a turn off, but I haven't heard anyone suggest he'll have influence in a Kerry Administration.

On Tuesday, I saw one of the Fox anchors arguing that Clinton's Strength and wisdom are not opposing values line was Bush-bashing. At worst, it was Bush-tapping.

On the other hand, I was just listening to Bill O'Reilly on the radio, and he was singing the praises of Edwards' speech. O'Reilly is often obnoxious, but he does not operate from the GOP playbook.

Kerry's Centrism May Be Sincere

Kerry has historically been a liberal rather than a centrist. But he is to all accounts running to the center in this campaign. The question is, how sincere is it?

What I can report is that I heard no grumbling about Kerry at the DLC event yesterday. Everyone seemed to be satisfied, and many enthusiastic, about Kerry.

On the other hand, at the lefty event co-sponsored by Tikkun, The Nation, and Mother Jones, there was quite a bit of grumbling about Kerry. What support he had was of the "hold the nose and vote" variety.

So if one can judge a candidate not by his rhetoric, but by the rhetoric of his supporters, Kerry may be an emerging centrist.

Oklahoma Delegates

I went onto the convention floor last night, and spoke to a couple people in the Oklahoma delegation. I was hoping to find Brad Carson, who is listed as a delegate. I was told that he was back home, campaigning for US Senate.

Carson is a centrist Democrat, and Republican primary voters have rejected the moderate Mayor of Oklahoma City in favor of Tom Coburn, who has said that doctors who do abortions should be subject to the death penalty. I know who I favor.

The Democrats Make Me Sick

I woke up this morning with a sore throat.

The convention is enjoyable, but grueling. Breakfast events start by 8AM. The speeches at the Fleet Center run on until 11PM, and then it's slow filing out through the dense crowd. I haven't even attempted to go to any late night parties. Carrying around the laptop, camera, tape recorder and other items was exhausting. Then, you're in contact with thousands of other people, sometimes in close proximity. Among the 20,000 people here, someone had a summer cold, and now I have one.

Seriously Reducing U.S. Homelessness?

Welcome to everybody here for the convention, and to everybody else who's been hanging out here of late. I'm a software designer and Internet entrepreneur, in Austin. This was my baby during the .com boom. This post is the first in my series of postings on suggestions on the kinds of systemic DLC-like reforms, like welfare reform was for Clinton, that I think Kerry and other Democratic leaders should be focusing on as more of a constructive positive agenda to use to reach out and add to the ABB coalition, and to widen the real scope of hope offered by the party.

It's about how to cut down on homelessness and improve mental health care. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that we don't really know how to end homelessness constructively without a high cost. The Soviets may well have ended it in their system, at the cost of housing some people in gulags and killing even more people. Many countries keep people with mental health problem in mental hospitals, kept under perpetual medicated "control"; the US moved away from that in the sixties. The UK, and probably several other Western European countries provide basic housing to people in the biggest categories that cause either chronic (mental illness), or acute need (floods, pregnancy, being a minor, etc.). The official UK homeless count is 1200 (20 per million), a number I can believe after being in Britain a week and only seeing one homeless person, a young woman apparently rather in shock at newly finding herself so, which suggests that most cases are dealt with quickly.

Given the junction between housing and free mental care, the status quo seems to me that homelessness is one area where the more socialistic economies rule. Arguably, the US has chosen a better life for the majority (arguably even most poor) through capitalistic housing and health care at the expense of the homeless. On the other hand, it seems to me that there should be a way to extend the full advantages of capitalism to the homeless, possibly allowing an even better result for the homeless than countries that treat their homeless as the UK does.

The most important measure I'm suggesting is to encourage private insurance carriers to offer and advertise homelessness insurance, a service that would provide fairly minimal shelter if you need it. U.S. Government homelessness figures say:

In 1996, an estimated 637,000 adults were homeless in a given week. In the same year, an estimated 2.1 million adults were homeless over the course of a year. These numbers increase dramatically when children are included, to 842,000 and 3.5 million, respectively.

Most - about 80% - exit from homelessness within about 2-3 weeks. They often have more personal, social, and economic resources to draw on than people who are homeless for longer periods of time.

About 10% are homeless for up to two months, with housing availability and affordability adding to the time they are homeless.

Another group of about 10% is homeless on a chronic, protracted basis - as long as 7-8 months in a two-year period. Disabilities associated with mental illnesses and substance use are common. On any given night, this group can account for up to 50% of those seeking emergency shelter.

The 842,000 number isn't directly comparable with the British 1200 figure, since that's probably an instantaneous estimate, but it is .2% of the 281M population reported in the 2000 census. If we could directly compare (which we can't), the two figures, it would be ten times as bad, an estimate that doesn't seem out of line with using eyeballs both in US cities and on my UK trip. Notice that, in theory, from the above figures, that just offering homelessness insurance - a place to stay when things go bad - could potentially cut our level down to the UK level, except without the economic distortions and dependency problems. Though some work would be needed to get a high insured rate - strong portability after a year of payments or something like that, or perhaps a prepayment arrangement of some sort. Strong portability would also allow people to move away from companies that treat them poorly. And certainly, insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to turn away the mentally unhealthy. Some experience would be needed to figure out practical rules to get best results.

Given a shelter cost, including overhead, of $250/wk (seems conservative to me), the average cost per episode of homelessness would be $1000 ($400 for the 2-week 80%, $200 for the 2-month 10%, and $430 for the 1/3-homeless chronic remaining 10%). The average insurance company cost / person/year would be (using the 3.5M / year out of a 281M total) a little over $12/yr, or just over $1 a month. Dunno about you, but if I thought I could avoid living on the street for a buck a month, I'd sign up in a second!

A second measure I feel is important is to continue improving mental health insurance. Remember that mental illness plays a big part in the chronically homeless figures, and even beyond that 10% estimated chronic homeless - there is no question that mental illness vastly raises one's chances of going homeless (unsurprising if you think about it). San Diego County says:

Studies on the prevalence of mental illness among the homeless vary depending on sampling site, methodology, population definition, and other factors. A review of recent literature (Fisher, 1991) estimates 25 to 60 percent of the national homeless population to be mentally ill. The median of these studies suggests that about a third of homeless adults have severe mental health problems. The National Institute of Mental Health and the Federal Task Force on the Homeless also estimate that roughly one-third of the homeless suffer from mental illness (1992).

How many incidences of people going homeless situations could be avoided (and have their lives vastly improved) if robust mental health care was offered as part of most health insurance packages? Here is an article suggesting that recent measures to boost parity have backfired. Pressure to improve mental health care should be maintained.

The third measure is to make cheap housing more available. Popular disgust has raised fairly high the expense of the minimum socially acceptable and/or legal dwelling, But that same disgust, even though usually sympathetic in nature to the inhabitants, fails to put oneself in the shoes of somebody who can't afford anything better. One problem we are having is that we are expecting the poorest of poor to live up to middle-class standards. The following attitude, found here, though understandable, is IMHO naive and part of the problem:

When housing is affordable, it is also unsafe, in disrepair, or located far from services or public transportation.

Personally, I'd rather live mile from anywhere, in a run-down shack, than be homeless, and I note that at least one homeless guy votes the same way with his feet, and, despite making it clear that it's no spa, wishes there were more such places. We aren't real good at allowing that choice, though. I'm not suggesting new low-cost housing so much as allowing old housing to stay on the market after decaying somewhat. That seems rather likelier to work than expecting real estate companies to lose money on new construction, a tactic that has only yielded limited results. It would be better if everybody could live in good housing, but we don't know how to do that.

A related measure, I think already in place in some places, is to subsidize people to move elsewhere. Although hard-hearted in some ways, this allows people to move from expensive real-estate markets to cheap ones, often with better job situations, too.

So why would people sign up for homelessness and mental health care in addition to the thick insurance packets that the insured already face? Well, probably most Americans have seen homeless people and thought, "I could be in that spot." Insurance company ad campaigns emphasizing that point in conjunction with the link between mental health and homelessness, I think, could produce good coverage in the long term.

How about the politics of this kind of change? Well, it would sure be easier than moving the US to a UK-style economy. What are the benefits, and what jobs change? Well, premium-payers win through peace-of-mind. Insurance companies win by getting more insurance payments and new markets to expand into. It's better for beneficiaries because, well, they're alot less likely to become homeless. Homelessness-related government and nonprofit jobs would shift from rather hopeless administration of care to more hopeful regulatory and observation roles. And the homeless would not only get basic shelter, but, assuming that changing insurer is possible, also the kind of good service that competition brings.

The people who inhabit the Web are utterly amazing. I can find out what it's like in Baghdad - before or after Saddam fell - and other cities in Iraq. At least as extraordinary is the view into homelessness provided by the homeless guy. Personally, I think it's pretty miraculous that he can and does blog this much. I hope he finds it a comfort, and reading him rather motivates my post. In fact, he says he has the kind of mental troubles that so many homeless have; they may be within the range of contemporary medication to deal with. Allow me to spin a sweet what-if dream if both the necessary drug technology and mental health insurance had been available to his family. His family could have (if it was willing to admit to his problems) gotten treatment for him, which probably would have been effective. He probably would at most see a short time on homelessness benefits, and would have the kind of solid social support network that keeps most of us off the street. He'd probably have a job and some savings (possibly a good one - the social anxieties are rather suggestive of a geek here), and maybe even a girlfriend. Getting out the ledger and looking at the cost of indefinite medication, I find it paid, in this dreamish fashion, by insurance payments either from his earnings or paid by his employer. The insurance companies make money, the drug companies make money, and best of all, his life is alot more fun.

UPDATE: On the terms described here alone, Homeless Insurance has the potential to be a $5Bish/yr industry. I'd be pretty surprised if the insurance industry couldn't find ways to get that still higher, by raising the value of the product offered.

Open Thread for Speeches

This is the place to comment about speeches at the convention tonight.

DLC

I attended the morning sessions put on by the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the leading centrist organization affiliated with the Democratic Party.

I chatted briefly to the DLC's Al From and Bruce Reed, and at greater length with Will Marshall of the associated Progressive Policy Institute. Will knew about the Centrist Coalition, and I will be following up on this contact in the future.

A major theme of the event is that the Bush Administration is not conservative when it comes to fiscal matters.

Also, that a Democrat could not get away with turning a surplus into a deficit the way the Bush Administration has.

We need a "rising tide" that does "lift all boats." The Republicans only focus on growth, but not on whether everyone shares in the growth.

There were many speakers, and no question and answer, which was unfortunately. Some of the speakers were snoozers, but Gene Sperling was dynamic. He talked about finding a middle ground on globalization, between the "sky is falling" and the no-worries points of view. He called for humility--that globalization is good, but we have to pay attention to the details, and be prepared for surprises.

An amusing moment came when one of the speakers said, "I guess we don't have any liberals in this room--well, maybe Bob Menendez."

Rep. Bob Menendez was the next speaker. He admitted to being a liberal, which he said was not incompatible with wanting to create a new, knowledge based economy.

Virginia Gov. Mark Warner was an engaging speaker. When a cellphone rang in the audience, he said it was okay. "Where you hear an annoying interruption, I hear ka-ching ka-ching" Warner made his fortune in the cellular industry. He also talked about a program to make the senior year in high school a more effective transition to college, or the working world. He said, "Senior year is wasted in most high schools--at least it was for me."

Press Bashing

Anti-war activists dressed up for a rally entitled What Have We Become? Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib

When I told the rally organizer that I was covering the convention for the Centrist Coalition, which tries to bridge the partisan divide, she said sarcastically, "Oh, so if left and right agree to support the war, then it's okay?"

I think she could work on her media relation skills. My immediate personal reaction was that I was being attacked, and why should I do her the favor of publicizing her cause? But I like the photo, so I'll run it.

Convention Photos And Meetings

I'll soon be posting about my meetings with John Avlon, author of Independent Nation, the DLC, and People of Faith for Kerry, as well as general convention news and photos.

You may be wondering where I've been. I've been at the DNC all day, but did not take my laptop with me, as I've found carrying it around, together with a camera and other equipment, to be exhausting.

And the Sharks Begin to Circle...

We've talked a lot about media bias, but when the election season gets into full swing political bias takes back seat to the greed for a scoop. And the sharks are circling.....

ABC News is reporting that the Democratic Party's biggest donor is "connected," as in SOPRANOS.

Officials: Democrat’s Biggest Money Man Has Mob Connections

The Deficit

Due to "improving economic conditions that have fueled higher tax revenues," the White House "will tout fiscal progress" and reduce the projected U.S. budget deficit for fiscal year 2005 by $100 billion. Sounds great. But Nick Confessore reminds us that the "bad news" is that it will still be the largest federal budget deficit in history. Yeah, not much for the GOP to brag about here.

I think that Kerry, who allegedly "has a proven record as a deficit hawk," should make the deficit the major domestic issue of his campaign. It is an issue that should resonate with the few remaining undecided voters.

Don't Offend Swing Voters

Gail Collins writes in the New York Times --

These are the great themes of the Democratic convention: 1) This is the most important political contest in the memory of man, and 2) it will be decided by six people in Ohio and Pennsylvania. The issues are cosmic, and the candidates are addressing a population the size of Toledo.

I find it unlikely that undecided voters (to the extent that they are even paying attention) are going to be seriously influenced by anything in this convention with the possible exception of Kerry's speech. But it appears to me that Collins is right in her conclusion that "[t]he great rule of this convention is that nobody should say anything to upset the swing voters." Expect the same approach next month at the GOP convention in New York.

Open Thread for Speeches

For any of you watching the convention speeches, here's the place to leave a comment

Marlette Editorial Cartoon Satirizes Bloggers

The talk of the convention is that there is no news. So we bloggers, rather than covering news, have actually become one of the larger news stories. Now, editorial cartoonist Doug Marlette has published a cartoon making fun of us. I love it!

There is no direct link to the cartoon. Use this link, select 7-26-04 from the pull down list, and click Get Image.

Transcripts

This is where the transcripts of the speeches are posted, post-embargo.

GOP Invites Bloggers

The GOP has sent out invitations to bloggers to cover the Republican Convention. Rather than invite applications, they've chosen the bloggers themselves, and sent out unsolicited invitations. Depending on how many invitations are accepted, they may send out more. Centerfield has not received an invitation. If we do, I'll let everybody know. I'm leaning toward the Democrats this year, so I'd be perfectly happy if one of our GOP-leaning bloggers, who might have more fun hanging out at that convention, goes to the gathering in Manhattan.

NDN vs. DLC

Two historically centrist organizations, The Democratic Leadership Council and the New Democrat Network are taking divergent paths.

It was hardly surprising then, that the DLC hosted a wonkish off-the-record lunch for journalists at Fenway Park on Sunday, in which red state Governors Mark Warner and Janet Napolitano explained how they closed their states' respective budget deficits. On Wednesday, the DLC plans an even wonkier briefing on job creation, with Kerry economic gurus like Gene Sperling and Steve Rattner. And in between, the DLC threw a sedate, Sunday night cocktail party near the Boston Aquarium that featured middle-aged delegates and lobbyists--an event moderate enough that even Louisiana Democratic Senate hopeful Chris John, who is keeping a low convention profile for fear of being linked with John Kerry back home, could stop by.

By contrast, the New Democrat Network's event--at a bar in the shadow of Fenway Park--was younger, more diverse, and more self-promotional. NDN is riding high these days, having been featured in a cover story in this week's New York Times Magazine, and it's hosting a blizzard of events all week. Unlike the DLC, there are no policy forums--the briefings are about political strategy. If NDN has an ideology, it seems to be that ideology is secondary; that Democrats need to embrace whatever and whoever can win.

Some Links

Convention Blog Watch (LA Times: Free Registration Required)
(note the link to Todd's post!)

The Blogger Circus (Washington Post)

Bloggers Offer Intimate View of Convention (NPR)

Steve Garfield's Videoblog

Josh Berthume gets onto the list at one of the parties.

0 Arrests So Far

The National Journal email alert reports nothing:

There have been no DNC-related arrests as of midnight Monday, the Secret Service reported. Authorities had originally reported one Sunday, but the woman who was arrested -- for lighting paper on fire in the street--turned out not to be a protester. Boston courts had cleared their schedule this week to handle DNC-related arrests.

I recommend checking out the National Journal this week. As a courtesy, they are allowing them premium content to be reviewed free this week. They are putting out daily printed editions at the convention which contain the best list of daily events. Their printed edition yesterday even quoted this post from Centerfield.

One For The Skipper

I thought one of the most powerful speeches last night was by the Reverend David Alston:

Manning the deck guns, most of us got wounded sooner or later, including Lieutenant Kerry. It would have been easiest, in an ambush, to simply rake the shore with return fire and roar on down the river to safety. But Lieutenant Kerry was known for taking the fight straight to the enemy. I can still see him now, standing in the doorway of the pilothouse, firing his M-16, shouting orders through the smoke and chaos.

Once, he even directed the helmsman to beach the boat, right into the teeth of an ambush, and pursued our attackers on foot, into the jungle. In the toughest of situations, Lieutenant Kerry showed judgment, loyalty and courage. Even wounded, or confronting sights no man should ever have to see, he never lost his cool.

And when the shooting stopped, he was always there too, with a caring hand on my shoulder asking, "Gunner, are you OK?" I was only 21, running on fear and adrenaline. Lieutenant Kerry always took the time to calm us down, to bring us back to reality, to give us hope, to show us what we truly had within ourselves. I came to love and respect him as a man I could trust with life itself.

I am a man of faith, and I did not come here tonight to glorify what we did. I came here to share my personal knowledge of a young naval officer who rose to the challenges and responsibilities of leadership, and who has always shown the courage to speak truth to power.

The full text:

The Reverend David Alston

Democratic National Convention

Monday, July 26, 2004

BOSTON, July 27 /PRNewswire/ -- The following is a transcript of a
speech by David Alston at the Democratic National Convention on Monday,
July 26, 2004:

Good evening.

My name is David Alston, and I am a minister from Columbia, South
Carolina. I join you here tonight in Boston-birthplace of the American
Revolution-to celebrate the bedrock ideals on which our nation was founded-
freedom, equality, and democracy.

I also come here tonight to honor a friend of mine, a man of courage
and conviction who has fought for these ideals his entire life: John
Kerry. Many of you in this hall already know John Kerry well. Others across
this land are still learning about his long and distinguished record of
public service.

I know him from a small boat in Vietnam, where we fought and bled
together, serving our country. There were six of us aboard PCF-94, a
50-foot, twin-engine craft known as a "Swift Boat." We all came from different
walks of life, but all of us-including our skipper, John
Kerry-volunteered for combat duty. And combat is what we got.

We usually patrolled the narrow waterways of the Mekong delta, flanked
on both sides by thick jungle. As our crewmate Gene Thorson put it, we
were a traveling bulls-eye. And we often came under sudden attack from
the enemy, hidden in the shadows. Machine-gun fire, rocket-propelled
grenades, it all came fast and furious, and Lieutenant Kerry had to make
quick, life-or-death decisions for the entire boat.

You have to realize, a Swift Boat isn't armored. The hull is aluminum,
about as thick as two nickels. And in the middle of a narrow river or
canal, with no cover at all, even small-caliber bullets could punch
right through it -- and often did.

Manning the deck guns, most of us got wounded sooner or later,
including Lieutenant Kerry. It would have been easiest, in an ambush, to simply
rake the shore with return fire and roar on down the river to safety.
But Lieutenant Kerry was known for taking the fight straight to the
enemy. I can still see him now, standing in the doorway of the pilothouse,
firing his M-16, shouting orders through the smoke and chaos.

Once, he even directed the helmsman to beach the boat, right into the
teeth of an ambush, and pursued our attackers on foot, into the jungle.
In the toughest of situations, Lieutenant Kerry showed judgment,
loyalty and courage. Even wounded, or confronting sights no man should ever
have to see, he never lost his cool.

And when the shooting stopped, he was always there too, with a caring
hand on my shoulder asking, "Gunner, are you OK?" I was only 21, running
on fear and adrenaline. Lieutenant Kerry always took the time to calm
us down, to bring us back to reality, to give us hope, to show us what
we truly had within ourselves. I came to love and respect him as a man I
could trust with life itself.

I am a man of faith, and I did not come here tonight to glorify what we
did. I came here to share my personal knowledge of a young naval
officer who rose to the challenges and responsibilities of leadership, and
who has always shown the courage to speak truth to power.

The 27th Psalm tells us, "Though an army besiege me, my heart will not
fear. Though war break out against me, even then I will be confident"
I stand before you tonight alive, while many of our brothers never made
it home. I am grateful to have lived to enjoy my children, to see them
grow up. But I stand here before you only because almighty God saw our
boat safely through those rivers of death and destruction, by giving us
a brave, wise, and decisive leader named John Kerry.

Today, 30 years after Vietnam, American soldiers are once again
fighting and dying on distant battlefields, at war with an elusive enemy. We
pray for these brave men and women. They are our friends, our
neighbors, our loved ones. Their loss brings all of us sadness beyond measure.

In a few short months, we will choose our next President. I believe we
need to elect a man of faith, experience, and wisdom. A man who knows
that defending America means defending our most fundamental rights. A
man who knows that leadership is not just about telling others what to
do, but inspiring them to do it. A man who knows the true meaning of
freedom, equality, and democracy. And that man is my former skipper, my
friend, and our next commander-in-chief, John Kerry.

Friends, here in this city more than two centuries ago, patriots
launched a revolution that changed history. Generations since have marched,
fought, and died to defend the sacred ideals of life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness-and to make these ideals a reality for every
American.

It is now our turn to defend these ideals. It is our time to speak out.
It is our duty to exercise our most precious right as Americans: the
right to vote.

So come November 2nd, join me in casting your ballot for a new,
principled, and courageous leader-America's next president-John Kerry.

Thank you.

Embargoes

I'm getting emails containing the text of the speeches tonight, including Ron Reagan's speech. His is "embargoed" until the delivery of the speech, which is scheduled for 10:02 PM. I guess this means that if I were assigned to cover Ron Reagan, I could pre-write the story, fill in some comments about his tone or the audiences reaction, and file the story the moment he finished speaking.

I understand now why Tom Brokaw didn't seem to be paying attention to Clinton's speech last night. He'd read it already.

Boots On The Ground

The American Friends Services Committee (AFSC), a Quaker organization, put out this display of 900 pairs of combat boots which symbolize American casualties in Iraq.

I spent some time talking to the young man who was coordinating this display, Noah Merrill. Unlike many who work with the AFSC, the 25 year-old Merrill was born into the Quaker Church. He believes that bringing peace is the essential message of Christ, which places him in disagreement with the Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, who accept just war theory.

A Seeker After Democracy

Ned McGinley started out from Coeur d'Alene, Idaho on July 4 to make a documentary about American democracy. He popped into town this morning, pulling his pickup into a parking spot just one ahead of the one I pulled into. We first started talking about change for the parking meter, and the conversation went on from there.

We ended up interviewing each other.

Ned is a left-of-center libertarian, and he wants to know, "What is democracy?" He has no convention credentials; he's just here to look around, talk to people, and film them.

One thing I mentioned is how centrism in the Democratic Party is often seen as an avenue for big money interests. At various sessions here, there have been discussions about how to mobilize large donors. That doesn't come without a price.

The centrism we push here at the Centrist Coalition is more about trying to get beyond the partisan rhetoric to finding creative solutions to problems that can satisfy both the left and the right. That's not something that is especially of interest in a "horse race" context like a political convention.

Totten is Back

Michael Totten is back after a month in Tunisia and he wants people to know it. He also is still an undecided voter.

I don’t know who I’m going to vote for in November. In the next few weeks and months I’m going to be thinking long and hard about this. I’m going to build two separate cases: The liberal case for Bush and the hawkish case for Kerry. Both strike me as dubious, and will strike most other people as dubious too. But I don’t have anything else to work with here.

I understand.

UPDATE: Right after I posted this, Totten linked to Rick's post about the protest.

Red God, Blue God

I'm at the session, Red God, Blue God: The God Gap In American Politics. Will post about this, but my battery may run out, and no outlet in sight.

Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention says that the fault line is now within denominations of Christianity, not across them. He feels he has more in common with the Pope than he does with fellow Baptists Jimmy Carter or Al Gore. The fault line is between those who believe in "absolutes" and those who think in "shades of gray."

Anna Greenberg spoke of "church shopping" leading to uniformity of opinion within a church. Whereas previously, people attended the local church of their denomination, now they are mobile, and pick a church--even a Catholic parish church--that is in line with their views.

Richard Land says that the Gay marriage has not eclipsed abortion issue. Anna Greenberg agrees. Younger religious people still think abortion has salience, but not gay marriage issue. Thus, the gay marriage issue may work for this election cycle, but it will fade in the long term. Those who oppose it are in danger of risking their long-term reputation for short-term political gain.

On the other hand, abortion has not faded. Younger religious conservatives are just as passionate as older ones. It will continue on indefinitely.

Only 40% of Catholics realize Kerry is Catholic.

Kerry is perceived to be a secular person, or an "inauthetic Catholic" by many. Shaun Casey spoke approvingly of Kerry's speech to African-American churches, and wishes he would share those same sentiment with a general audience.

Kerry needs to share his spiritual autobiography. It worked for Clinton. Unless he does so, many religious people will assume he's secular, and does not share their values.

Greenberg: America is getting more religious and less religious at the same time. People are polarizing around either being secular or highly religious, with the middle-ground fading.

Land: The divide between the US on one hand, and Canada and Europe on the other, can be attributed to religious involvement. The US is more like Nigeria in being a very religous country. Europe is highly secular.

Casey: Bush gave an interview to Charisma Magazine in 2000. Gore did not return the phone call. It's a magazine for Pentecostelists with 400,000 circulation.

Casey: Rate and number of abortions went down under Clinton, due to reduction in poverty. Many Catholics are on the left, except for the abortion issue. They feel they can't even breathe their "pro-life" sympathies, however.

Land: GOP is more tolerant on diverse views of abortion. Both pro-choice and pro-life speaks at the convention. Pro-choice litmus test applied to Democrats before their given a prominent role.

Land: Strong believer in "just war" theory. Can debate whether Iraq War meets test.

Casey: I opposed Iraq War as it did not meet just war criteria. The tragedy is that we SHOULD INTERVENE IN SUDAN, but we won't, because of the folly of Iraq.

The Big Speech

A new Washington Post poll concludes that Kerry is going backwards, not forwards, and voters don't know what policies he would pursue as president.

A majority of voters say they know little about John F. Kerry's positions on key issues and want the Democratic presidential candidate to detail specific plans for handling the economy, Iraq and the war on terrorism when he addresses the Democratic National Convention and a nationally televised audience on Thursday, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. . . .

In virtually every measure tested, Kerry's image has eroded in recent weeks.

David Brooks reports that even Democrats in Boston have widely different ideas about Kerry.

Over the last few days I have spoken to Democrats who are firmly convinced he is a hawkish free-trading fiscal conservative who believes that life begins at conception, that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that the U.S. should bulk up its forces in Iraq. I've also spoken to other Democrats just as convinced the Kerry is really a protectionist, socially liberal dove who actually opposes the war and supports gay marriage and nationalized health care.

It seems fair to conclude that Kerry's convention speech will be the most important speech given by any presidential candidate in recent history.

Out But Not Down

Bill Clinton looks really small from the upper tiers of the Fleet Center. I brought binoculars with me, so I could verify it was him, if the big TV screen over the podium didn't give it away. Hillary Clinton was more striking to the naked eye in her canary yellow suit. Overall, the experience of seeing the speakers live didn't seem that much different that watching them on TV.

What was more interesting was scanning the crowd. NBC, CBS, and CNN have adjacent press boxes, so when you are watching one of them, the other two are on either sides of the next wall. Dan Rather listened attentively to both Clinton speeches, while Brokaw had his back to them and seem to be reading some notes. Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala on CNN had their backs to the podium, and watched Sen. Clinton on the TV monitor.

What I saw was a party that was "out but not down." That is, the Democrats are out of power in both the White House and Congress, but they seemed confidence, not only of having a good chance of winning the White House, but of also governing effectively. Bill Clinton may be the only Democratic ex-President who was still alive and considered a success four years after he left office. I don't doubt he could be nominated for the 3rd term if the Constitution permitted it.

"Strength and wisdom are not opposing values..."

I am dying to here Rick's posts for the evening, but I had to comment on Clinton's speech. For those of you who missed it, in my opinion you missed the best reason that anybody has given for a President Kerry.

I hope the discussion surrounding the speech tonight is not talk about Clinton's charisma and whether or not he overshadows the Senator. What is important in my mind is the message that the former President articulated: we cannot allow ideology to cloud our judgments on matters of public policy in America... we not only need to be strong, but wise.

Clinton did what in my mind Kerry has failed to do so far, he not only pointed out what was wrong with many Bush policies but he argued forcefully for a centrist "New Democrat" alternative. My support for a President that is clearly not the centrist he said he was is, in more ways then one, based on a fear that the reason Kerry has yet to articulate anything other than he is not George W. Bush, is that his heart truly is to the extreme left of Bill Clinton's Democratic Party. If I could be convinced that this was not the case, and that Clinton's message was Kerry's message, not only would I argue he would win this election, but he just might win the vote of this Republican.

Kucinich Campers Unhappy

I attended an event sponsored by Tikkun Magazine this afternoon. As I expected, it was a left-wing crowd, with clear Kucinich leanings. One delegate who is apparently pledged to Kucinich spoke passionately about Kucinich delegates being unhappy about having to display unity with Kerry without getting much in return beside a speaking slot for the former candidate.

I was very impressed by Thomas Moore, a former Catholic monk and author of Care of the Soul. While he shares is very much on the left politically, he spoke about overcoming polarization, and engaging in dialogue with people on the right of the political spectrum. He was touching on a theme we often cover at Centerfield--the way to get beyond angry political debate and bring people together to solve problems.

Monday Photos and Events

If you example this photo, I think you'll agree that there is a difference between liberals and the radical left, no matter what Anne Coulter says.


This march took place in downtown Boston, far from the Fleet Center, and through the commercial hub of downtown crossing. To prevent possible property damage, marchers were followed by bicycle cops and these

On a lighter note, the blogger breakfast was graced by rising political star Barack Obama, below, who was witty, and knows how to keep a speech short. I broke away from the breakfast and shared a cab with two other bloggers, who turned out to be Kos and Atrios. to get over the the New Democrat Network talk. I also joined them at lunch with Sam Seder of Air America.

How liberal is Kerry? How conservative is Bush?

An op-ed in the New York Times today with a chart says that Kerry is more liberal than the median Senate Democrat and Bush is more conservative than the median Senate Republican. Not exactly stunning information, but the article is interesting nevertheless.

Sully Lays Down Gauntlet

Sully today:

WHAT KERRY MUST SAY: The most important task of this convention is to persuade Americans that a future Democratic administration will fight this country's enemies with a passion and energy and consistency at least comparable to Bush's.

That sums it up for me. This is either the move Kerry makes convincingly enough to grab the swing voters he needs to win, or it's the move he fails to make forcefully enough to convince the needed swing voters whose opinion is that our response to islamic terrorism going forward must be our primary priority. Kerry is not going to get away with demurring.

CSPAN THIS AM

I went on C-SPAN's Washington Journal for about 5 minutes this morning, speaking with them over the phone from my home. I discussed the Centrist Coalition and gave out the URL.

I then rushed over the blogger breakfast, which had a surprise guest--Illinois Senate candidate Barack Obama, who was witty and charming, and spoke briefly, which is always welcome.

I'm now at a huge presentation put out by the New Democrat Network, listening to David Brock, former conservative, is outlining the conservative infrastructure of think tanks and organizations. The NDN is hoping to create a liberal copycat structure.

Gore Censored?

In order to keep the more, um, zealous speakers from making a negative impression on swing voters, DNC convention organizers have insisted on vetting all speeches ahead of time. Now MSNBC reports that even Al Gore is not exempt.

So the word is out: the liberal wing of the party is being told to avoid any harsh rhetoric. That could already be affecting tonight's headliners: last night, Al Gore's speech was basically torn up, according to two sources, and is now being rewritten, presumably to fit more closely with the party line.

"Beantown Becomes Blogtown"

John Fund today:

It isn't news that more than 15,000 journalists are descending on this city to cover the Democratic convention. What is news is that for the first time several dozen political bloggers will receive media credentials to report on the event. Pay attention to these savvy computer mavens, for their postings are one of the most interesting ways in which the Internet is empowering people and shaping political coverage. . . .

It will always be possible for someone to point to many of the millions of amateur bloggers and dismiss them as nerdy faddists and their work as largely trivial. Most bloggers will burn out and move on to something else. But a handful are slowly building a shadow media infrastructure that will become a significant component of the media in the 21st century. There might not be much news at this year's Democratic convention, but a real story can be found in the bloggers who are making their debut this week at a major national political conclave.

A Little About Me

Speaking of personal stories, the quick rundown on me: I'm 45, a software engineer between jobs, and a registered Independent, married without children. I have a history as a swing voter. I prefer divided government. While I plan to vote for John Kerry, I hope he has to work with a Congress in which either the House or Senate remains in Republican hands. If he can do that successfully, then perhaps I might be comfortable with him having a Democratic majority to work with in future sessions of Congress.

I am the creator of the Centerfield blog, and one of ten or so writers who contribute to it. In addition to writing for this group blog, I have my own personal weblogs. Open Source Novel is my literary blog. Transparent Eye is my spiritual blog. I also contribute to Blogcritics.

In addition to blog writing, I am a published science fiction writer. I've just completed a book entitled Transparent Eye: A Memoir Of Painful Vision In California.

Bloggers vs. Journalists

I spent some time yesterday speaking with Dan Rubin of the Philadelphia Inquirer, who has just started his own blog. I said to him that I don't go in for the blog triumphalism, that they are somehow better than journalism because they are unconstrained. I admire the attempt at objectivity which journalists make--at least those in the news hole. What I like about blogs in not the insertion of advocacy and editorializing, but the ability to tell personal stories.

Journalism tries to be authoritative by banishing the first person voice. But there is a writer behind every article--computers are not that good yet--and to a certain extent, the hiding of that person behind the authoritative voice only presents the appearance of objectivity. The opinions we have, and even the news that we think is important, has something to do with our personal stories. Be as objective as you can, I say, but also be forthright about the person doing the reporting.

Hello, World

Given the number of new readers due to the convention coverage, I offer the standard greeting produced by the newbie computer programmer.

Hello, world. Welcome to Centerfield, the blog of the Centrist Coalition. The Centrist Coalition is grassroots group of moderate Republicans, Independents, and centrist Democrats who believe that strong leadership involves a bold mix of views drawn partly from the right and partly the left. We welcome new members. There is no cost to join. Members may participate in the Centerfield weblog or the Centrist Forum.

We try to promote civil dialogue, but there is one way to tick us off: by saying that centrism is nothing more than a strategy of caution, compromise, and defense of the status quo. We don't think so. Oftentimes, the two parties are so locked into their traditional positions that an independent, centrist candidate can break the mold. There are very smart people on all sides of the political spectrum, and we ignore their contribution at our peril. By finding common ground, and creating new syntheses that appeal to all sides, our society can move forward.

Todays Convention Events And Photos

This afternoon, I went to downtown Boston to collect my credentials, and inspect the blog work space at the Fleet Center.

At the time I walked by, there were no protests going on in the designated protest zone. While I'm not in much sympathy with protestors, I must admit that the protest zone is highly constrained, running in a narrow north/south axis perpendicular to the Fleet Center, and surrounded by wire. I wouldn't feel very safe inside of it in a crush. Here is a view of the Fleet Center from the protest zone.




On the other hand, the protest zone runs alongside the lot where the buses deliver the delegates, separated only by a fence. So I think delegates will have a decent view of any protestors inside the zone.

While there were no protests in the zone, there was some guerilla theatre from the Missile Dick Chicks, real women in outrageous costumes.



I saw one protest today, a colorful one by Falun Gong, the Chinese exercise practice that has given birth to an anti-Beijing political movement. There were hundreds of Falun Gong members, most dressed in yellow, or traditional costumes, in Copley Square, opposite several delegate hotels



They put on their own street theater display, depicting a scene of torture in the People's Republic of China



My photos from inside the Fleet Center did not come out (too dark). Bloggers are up in section 321 on the 7th level, which is fairly distant from but looks straight onto the podium on the convention floor. We have electrical outlets and Internet access, so we can blog while watching the speeches.

On my explorations this afternoon, I was joined by Dave Winer of Scripting News and Michael Feldman of Dowbridge. Dave was audio-blogging, walking around with a microphone and interviewing people. I spoke to a guy wearing a Teamsters For Kerry-Edwards shirt. He turned out to be a delegate from Utah who drives a UPS van. He doesn't expect Kerry to win Utah, but expects him to run ahead of Gore.

Meanwhile, Republicans have set up shop near the Fleet Center to try to respond to the Democrats. I would like to speak with them, but don't know yet where they are located. I have found their Internet site, demsextrememakeover.com

I met a number of other bloggers, including Patrick Belton and David Adesnik of Oxblog, and Matt Welch, who was not wearing the hat in the picture on his site, but was still distinctively attired.

There's more, but I have to go to sleep in order to attend to the blogger breakfast tomorrow morning.

Dump Truman

The New Republic (1948).

On one side the Democrats face a revived Republican Party. Its platform is written to appeal to independents. Its new managers are master builders in organization, trained to take and to hold political power. Its nominees are strong. Both gain from impressive records, relative freedom from the actions of the 80th Congress and the ability to win important labor support by the use of a little reform and a lot of patronage.

On the other side the Democrats face the New Party. Its program is militant. Its leadership is aggressive. Its basic support is solid. History may be on its side. . . .

Harry Truman and his friends have failed to act as the party in power in fighting for liberal measures. They have failed to act as the party in opposition by opposing reactionary measures pushed by Republicans. If they keep control of the Democratic Party, then the Democratic Party will be replaced as the party in power by the Republicans in November, and it will be replaced as the party in opposition by the New Party after November.

Andrew Sullivan: "D'oh!"

Details on Delegates

Boston.com has a nice feature detailing the background of each individual delegate. Just click on a state to get age, hometown, and occupation, including if they are a professional pol.

YAY, LANCE!!

Lance Armstrong is now very likely to put the first-ever win #6 in the Tour de France under his belt.

This afternoon a local DJ was playing tunes having to do with "6" and "yellow.

Now there is a man who shows us what we can be.

Incivility Not New

Joshua Claybourn's Domain has dug up an artifact of the religious right's attack on the Democratic nominee in 1928.

Convention Delegates Polled

The NY Times has done some polling of convention delegates as part of its convention special coverage.

The delegates think of themselves — and Mr. Kerry, for that matter — as politically moderate. But on divisive social issues like abortion, the death penalty and gay marriage, the delegates are not only much more liberal than voters in general but substantially more liberal than typical Democratic voters. At every Democratic convention, the delegates hold more liberal positions than rank-and-file Democrats, just as Republican delegates are always more conservative than their voters. That is the nature of political activists.

Is active centrism an unnatural act?

Bull Sessions

Dan Kennedy, reporter for the Boston Phoenix, has produced a media guide to the big names in journalism who will be covering the convention. Regarding convention bloggers, he writes

Much has been made of the fact that the Democrats have decided to issue credentials to people who write weblogs. It should be interesting: some are professional journalists, some are wanna-bes, and many are don’t-wanna-bes, loudly claiming their status as an alternative to a mainstream media grown complacent and out-of-touch.

Though it may sound self-deprecating, chalk me up as a wanna-be. Unlike some bloggers, I don't think bloggers are better than or will replace "real journalists." For the most part, they're worse--recycling news rather than reporting it, and mixing fact and opinion. I think objectivity is a good thing to aspire to, even though impossible to achieve.

Where blogs are useful is as a supplement to journalism. By lowering the cost of publication, blogs do allow individuals or communities that have been ignored by the media to get their message out. But mainly, aren't blogs just an extension of late-night bull sessions that you had in your college dorm? It's fun to talk about politics, and blogs, especially those which have comments, allow you to do that.

High school dirty politics: where did they learn that?

A few days ago, during a discussion about why we call ourselves centrists, I mentioned that society must always strive to maintain a balance between competitive and cooperative forces. In my judgment we've moved too far to the competitive side. Whether you agree or not, I think this op-ed by Matt Johanson appearing in the Los Angeles Times illustrates one example of excess:

Campaign posters blanket the walls each election week at the high school where I teach. This year, some posters reflected a more unscrupulous election than usual.

"Bob has no friends, he's flunking all his classes and he got dumped by the ugliest girl in school," taunted the posters of Beatriz, a candidate for student school board member. Beatriz's signs encouraged student voters to avoid Bob the human disaster zone by electing her instead.

Robert, Beatriz's opponent, complained that her posters identified and humiliated him, though Beatriz claimed her "Bob" was merely a fictional character she created. The school forced her to remove the signs and apologize in front of the entire student body.

Vote-fixing also marred our election, as student delegates at the nominating convention altered counts from primary ballots to support Athena, a late entry in the race for student body secretary. Our student activities director, whose students counted the ballots beforehand to guard against just such conniving, detected the discrepancy and overturned the doctored vote. Athena was allowed to pursue a write-in candidacy, but her name did not appear on the ballot.

...

The students in both scandals acted much like many of their adult counterparts, in accordance (whether they knew it or not) with the advice of master strategist Sun Tzu.

Sun Tzu, an ancient Chinese general, was author of "The Art of War." As my political science professor once emphasized, Sun Tzu's writing about principles of conflict applies to politics and elections as much as to armies and battlefields.

"He who is skilled in attack flashes forth from the topmost heights of heaven," Sun Tzu wrote. Translation: Attack politics are mandatory as long as they are effective. "All warfare is based on deception…. The skillful fighter puts himself into a position that makes defeat impossible." Translation: Why not commit election fraud? Do you want to win or not?

On the lighter side (Vol. 10)

- McCain said serving as VP would be like returning to prison camp (here)
- The 50 Most Beautiful People on Capital Hill (here)
- "Bigger Breasts for Free: Join the Army" (here)
- ENCORE: "This Land" - Servers were overwhelmed last week. If you haven't seen this, you must watch it (but not while drinking coffee). It has even been featured on the Today Show.

Fake Centrism Planned For RNC

Peter Beinart at The New Republic (article requires subscription, sorry) warns that the speakers like up for the Republican National Convention do not at all reflect the governing party

On Monday, the convention's opening night, Republican delegates will be treated to speeches by John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg is a liberal who agrees far more with John Kerry than with George W. Bush. On economic and cultural policy, McCain has, in recent years, become a liberal--which is why Kerry could seriously contemplate him as a running mate. And Giuliani, despite his tough-guy reputation, is at least as liberal as Kerry on abortion, immigration, and gay rights--and not far from him on economics either. (He never seriously cut government as mayor of New York.)

On Tuesday night, the Republicans send up Rod Paige, a living testament to the GOP's embrace of affirmative action, Laura Bush, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, a man who not only preaches cultural liberalism, but practices it. Wednesday night is Zell Miller, who is allowed to be conservative because he's a Democrat, and Cheney. Thursday is Bush himself, nominated by yet another pro-gay rights, pro-choicer, New York Governor George Pataki.

As John Avlon's Independent Nation details, Bush ran as a centrist in 2000. However, he's governed as a conservative. It looks like there is a belated attempt to burnish a cent