I watched the debates and admired Barack Obama’s strongly expressed commitment to “engagement” — particularly with leaders of states with whom America was in conflict. This was a great contrast from Hillary Clinton’s positon — and even a starker contrast with McCain’s.

Tom Edsall thinks so — tomorrow night. Edsall writes: Hillary Clinton has summoned top donors and backers to attend her speech tomorrow night in an unusual move that is being widely interpreted to mean she plans to suspend her campaign and endorse Barack Obama.

I’ve been listening for some time to a number of my friends who have been active in the “net neutrality” debate.

I haven’t had time to read General Ricardo Sanchez’s book on the Iraq War and his critique of Bush and his team, but super editor and writer Tom Engelhardt has.

General William Odom, former Director of the National Security Agency, was an early critic of the Bush administration’s obsession with invading Iraq. He called the decision the worst strategic mistake in American military history in the last century and perhaps since the establishment of the Republic.

On October 19, 2005, Lawrence Wilkerson — Colin Powell’s aide, friend, and chief of staff respectively for 16 years — cleared his throat and conscience about what he saw as a Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal that was warping and distorting the nation’s national security decision making process.

According to UVA’s Larry Sabato, quoted in the Save Darfur Coalition’s press release, it’s the most significant joint statement by rival presidential candidates since advisors to FDR and Dewey pronounced the shared resolve of their bosses to defeat the Axis powers in 1944. The statement is here.

This is my next read. It’s overdue — and I’m sad to see that McClellan basically waited all of this time to tell his story. He should have gotten word to Patrick Fitzgerald that Libby and Rove were coordinating their Valerie Plame stories. But the worst is even more confirmation that George W.