Barack Obama is unveiling sweeping ethics reforms in a speech in New Hampshire today.

Following closely on the heels of yesterday's disclosure of his earmark requests -- and his earlier disclosures of his full tax records and his campaign bundlers, among other efforts -- Obama's pledge to enact bold ethics reforms on his first day as President solidifies his standing as the candidate most committed to bringing increased transparency to the business of government.

And his comprehensive recommendations are a strong rebuke to the abuses of the Bush administration, as well.

According to the press release, Obama's speech will:

1. Close the Revolving Door between Government and the private sector
2. End Abuse of No-Bid Contracts
3. Restore Objectivity to the Executive Branch
4. Increase Public Access to Information

UPDATE: The always excellent Greg Sargent at TPM Cafe's Election Central reports that Craig Holman of the Ralph Nader founded Public Citizen "endorses all the principles in Obama's speech. "These are all things we've been advocating for several years now," he says. "Obama has been working on many of these reforms for the last year."

More details and Sargent's full report below the fold...

Before I get to Jennifer Hunter's absurd non-review of the Audacity of Hope, a little background...

I had a previous encounter with the Chicago Sun-Times columnist following her debut piece on Obama. Though couched as a historical review of Lincoln, it was ulitmately a hit piece that seemed intended to undermine the campaign -- accusing it of "hubris" for the Springfield backdrop -- on the day before the official Feb. 10th announcement speech.

Opinion is opinion, and that's fine, I suppose, but this timely scolding was incorrectly labeled as "news."

More below the fold...

I've had a chance to reflect on the diary I wrote yesterday. I think some of the comments were valid and I appreciate the responses. I just want to clarify, too, that I was not specifically singling out Jerome, Matt, Chris or anybody else. It really was just meant as a call for all of us in the movement to work together to combat damaging narratives that could spell disaster for the general election if we don't all pull together.

But, since Jerome basically confirmed what I suspected -- that, at least as far as he's concerned, Obama doesn't really deserve to have any kind of institutional support from MyDD (and other leading blog communities) to combat really, really bad reporting, I thought I'd follow people's advice to do my part and pass along this very good article from the Las Vegas Sun that I got off the E-Wire (which until this morning didn't feature Obama, but, Jerome says it was due to a typo in the script).

The article lays out much of what I was getting at in my diary, but says it in a way that may make more sense to folks who were confused about what I said yesterday.

Finally, one commenter suspected that I was a sock puppet of someone else. I'm not. My name is Neil Jensen. Among other things, I did some on-site volunteer work with the Dean Web Team in '03 and '04, am a front-page writer on the BlogPac-funded Green Mountain Daily, and am currently the lead volunteer organizer for Obama in Vermont.

Further Disclosure: I think I once saw Jerome in a grocery store in Burlington. Might have been the Price Chopper on Shelburne Road.

Good excerpt below the fold, but read the whole thing...

This has been a sad week for political reporting on Barack Obama. But, it has also been inspiring to see the impressive work being done by Glenn Greenwald, Greg Sargent, Media Matters, Will Bunch, Obamarama, Steve Benen and many others who've gone to bat for Obama to push back on the inanity.

Regardless of who these folks support for president, at least they recognize that these kinds of Gore 2000-like smears and innuendo are deeply injurious to the goals of all Democrats and progressives.

But, here's the thing... After the mini Edwards BloggerGate from earlier this year, the folks at MyDD used their considerable clout and energy to push back against the Noise Machine, mobilizing people through MyDD, Daily Kos, and BlogPac, etc. (And yes I know that that issue affected "bloggers" so it was perhaps a more personal attack).

But, for Obama this week? Near complete silence. We all know that yesterday it was Edwards, today it's Obama, tomorrow will Clinton, etc. And since all of us, regardless of who we support for '08 have helped build this movement (and I'm certainly not suggesting I've put anywhere near the energy into it as Bowers and Stoller et al) it doesn't sit well that this power has been used for one candidate and not all.

I'm not suggesting a Townhall conspiracy here, but I just wanted to get that off my chest. I'd be very interested in hearing a different point of view.

I know this may be poor form, but I think it needs to be done...

Say this out loud in your best upcoming SNL impression (seriously, get into an Obama groove -- and the Obama campaign should really put this on video)...

But admit it Matt Stoller, Obama makes the ask...

Dear Matt,

The special-interest industry in Washington has only grown since the last election, and it will spend more money than ever this time to try to own our political process and dictate our policies in Washington.

We're not going to play that game. We're not taking any contributions from Washington lobbyists or political action committees.

We're going to transform the political process by bringing together hundreds of thousands of ordinary Americans to build a campaign responsible to no one but the people -- people like you.

So here's something different. Right now someone is waiting to match your first online donation to our campaign, doubling your impact.

If you make your first online donation now, you'll be able to read a note from the person who matched your amount, and you'll be able to write to them about why you gave.

Thousands of people who've already donated to the campaign have committed to give again -- but only if someone like you decides to make their first online donation.

Will you make your donation now?

http://action.barackobama.com/match

We need to dramatically multiply the number of people who own a piece of this historic campaign, because the only way we can win is by making this campaign belong to as many people as possible.

It may sound strange for a presidential candidate to launch a fundraising drive that isn't about dollars.

But this campaign isn't just about money. And our democracy shouldn't be either.

It should be about people.

People's demands are simple. An end to the war in Iraq and the restoration of American leadership in the world; equal opportunity for themselves and their children at home; and the hope that their voice matters in a political process that too often leaves the people out.

You can take ownership of our democracy -- make a donation now:

http://action.barackobama.com/match

I'm deeply honored that so many people have put their hope and faith in our campaign.

And if we succeed, it will be because you made history and took control of our campaign's destiny.

I know we can do this.

Thank you,

Barack Obama

P.S. -- If you'd like to make a donation without being part of the new donor drive, you can do so here: https:/donate.barackobama.com

----

Paid for by Obama for America

[Crossposted at What's the Point?]

During the 2004 election season, a campaign by MoveOn.org, Arianna Huffington, and Joe Trippi implored John Kerry to "go big."

The kick-off email began...

Dear MoveOn member,

As George Bush's poll numbers drop, John Kerry is facing an important choice — perhaps the most important choice he'll make in his campaign. He has to decide whether, as some consultants will urge, he should be cautious, or whether he should present a bold agenda for change and rally all Americans around a common vision for our future.

Throughout his life, John Kerry has made a practice of standing up for bold initiatives to provide health care, protect the environment, and guarantee truth-telling in government. Together, we need to let him know that we want him to be his best, boldest self — to go big, ask more from us, and power his campaign on the politics of hope and progress.

ABC News has a pretty good article and video from January 25th which details some of the origins of the fake Insight Magazine madrassa story -- and the Obama camp's response to it.

But, one section should make Obama supporters* a little bit nervous. Even if the tone might be unfairly reinforcing the "Obama is too green" media narrative that has developed...

 "About three or four months ago, something  started surfing around the Web and it was a pretty scurrilous article  suggesting not only that I had gone to a Madrassa, but that my family  members were Muslim radicals," Obama said. "And we didn't make much of  it … you can't control what's on the Web. What was surprising was that  it eventually bubbled up into the mainstream media."

Were Obama, and others in his campaign, really that surprised? I certainly hope not. While some commentators have expressed admiration for the way the Obama team responded to this smear attempt, others have wondered what took them so long (I know, I know - Larry Sabato, but) ...

  "The Obama camp didn't know whether to deny this, thereby making it a  legitimate issue for every media organization, or whether to ignore it  and hope that false rumor would simply go away," said Larry Sabato,  Robert Kent Gooch Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia.  "They actually failed to make a decision promptly, which probably  brought them the worst of both worlds."

Unfortunately, what we should all have learned from the numerous, unsubstantiated smears made against the Clintons, Al Gore, Howard Dean, John Kerry, and others, is that it doesn't matter if it's true.

As the close of ABC's article suggests...

"Frankly, some of this will stick because no  matter how thoroughly you debunk a story, the allegation is out there,"  Ornstein said.
 

Mark Twain once said that a lie can travel halfway around the  world while the truth is still putting on its shoes. With the  presidential campaign season heating up so soon, those lies have  already begun their travels.

So far, though, it seems to have been a few members of the netroots (particulary JHC at Obamarama.org) who've been handling Obama's rapid response... um... rapidly. (See "The Truth About ObamaTruth.org).

*Disclosure: I'm one of them.

[While I was writing  this, I did a little surfing and realized that the Carpetbagger is discussing the same issue.]

[Crossposted at What's the Point?]

There's a John Updike collection of short stories called Too Far to Go that describes, among other things, the deep sadness of a married couple who are losing or have lost the connection that brought them together.

In the title story (I think - I may have some details wrong, but this is what I remember), there is a deeply melancholic scene that describes the husband lying awake while his wife is sleeping in the same room, but in a separate bed.

It captures the helplessness and vulnerability that can set in during the quiet, lonely half-asleep hours of the night, when it can seem impossible to find the strength within oneself to rise and deal with the things that need to be dealt with.

The hours when one's bed becomes like a womb, and even the most confident and capable of adults are left to feel like weak and dependent infants, incapable of leaving the warmth and security beneath the covers.

The husband tries to find the energy and strength within himself to simply get up and join his wife, who is only just a few feet away, and begin to rebuild the trust and affection in their marriage.

But, he can't. It is just too far to go.

I'm very happily married, but for some reason that brief scene and the phrase "too far to go" have always stayed with me. Not in relation to a lack of marital bliss, but to all the other things in my life that can feel occasionally insurmountable.

So, today, while reading the Carpetbagger's reporting  (I know Stoller broke it earlier in Breaking Blue) that Dean Webmaster Nicco Mele was signing on to McCain's probable run for President, it was the first thing I thought of.

I had the pleasure of working with Nicco on-site at Dean HQ during the primary campaign.

And though I didn't spend too much time with him, he struck me as a very decent, thoughtful, intelligent human being. His work with EchoDitto and his interest in and support of citizen journalism have been very laudable.

One of the things that most people wouldn't know is that quite a few of the main Dean web people (and probably many of the others, including Howard) were not at all sharply partisan about Dean and would often say favorable things about his opponents. And had very nuanced opinions about a number of topics. Meaning, well, they were very reasonable, non-dogmatic people.

But, McCain, Nicco? Really?

Sure, he's not pure evil, but he could have done so much more in the last five and a half years to help blunt the disaster of the Bush administration. No need to detail the atrocities.

And given the current condition of America and our place in the world, to me that is entirely unforgivable.

Supporting McCain?

It's just too far to go, Nicco.