SOMETHING FAR FROM BOSTON, involving the latest X-prize developments, over at GlennReynolds.com.

THIS CAN’T BE GOOD NEWS FOR KERRY:

Breaking sharply with the enforced harmony of the Democratic National Convention, the president of the largest AFL-CIO union said Monday that both organized labor and the Democratic Party might be better off in the long run if Sen. John F. Kerry loses the election.

Andrew L. Stern, the head of the 1.6 million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said in an interview with The Washington Post that both the party and its longtime ally, the labor movement, are “in deep crisis,” devoid of new ideas and working with archaic structures.

Stern argued that Kerry’s election might stifle needed reform within the party and the labor movement.

Neither, probably, is this:

Whether democracy is really coming to Iraq, or whether it is even possible here, seemed of no immediate concern to Dr. Ahmad Abu-Raghif, a physician in Baghdad. He was game anyway.

He showed up at a university hall here on Sunday with a good haircut, a blue suit and a big smile: the outfit of the office-seeker worldwide. He buttonholed 50 people, he said, at the grass-roots caucus, making the pitch for their votes. . . .

Caucuses like the one Dr. Abu-Raghif attended have been convening around Iraq to select roughly 1,000 delegates, who will hold a national conference in Baghdad in the next week.

The concrete goal of the conference is to vote – openly and freely – on a 100-seat transitional council that will oversee the government of Iyad Allawi, the interim prime minister, until national elections are held in January.

(How do we know it’s bad news for Kerry? The UN wants to delay elections!) And, while we’re on the list of things that sound bad for Kerry, how about this report?

U.S. consumer confidence rose this month to a two-year high, boosted by an improving job market that also is helping keep new-home sales close to a record. . . .

The creation of 1.3 million jobs so far this election year is starting to lift optimism that lagged as gasoline prices rose as much as 35 percent and higher food and health-care costs helped pushed consumer prices up 3.3 percent from June 2003. The Conference Board said the percentage of Americans who consider jobs hard to find is now the lowest since October 2000.

It must be a bummer to be in a situation where all this good news feels like bad news.

UPDATE: The terrible tidings just keep rolling in:

The first-ever public opinion poll in Afghanistan shows that people there are optimistic about the future and excited about upcoming elections. . . .

Afghanistan has a constitution, is registering voters and is moving toward holding a presidential election in October. And the survey of 804 randomly selected male and female Afghan citizens, commissioned by the Asia Foundation notes that:

* 64 percent say the country is heading in the right direction.

* 81 percent say that they plan to vote in the October election.

* 77 percent say they believe the elections will “make a difference.”

* 64 percent say they rarely or never worry about their personal safety, while under the Taliban only 36 percent felt that way.

* 62 percent rate President Hamid Karzai’s performance as either good or excellent.

This was no pro-Bush put-up job. The polling firm, Charney Research, is a partisan Democratic polling firm. And superstar Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who’s read the study — and who has worked on similar polling in developing countries — calls it “very reliable.”

The horror, the horror.

I PROMISED HIM THAT I WOULDN’T OUT HIM a long time ago, but now Atrios has been unmasked as a guy named Duncan Black who, among other things, works for David Brock’s Soros-funded Media Matters operation. Nothing wrong with that, but if I were working for, say, Richard Mellon Scaife, I think somebody — like, say, Duncan Black — would be making something of it.

TVNEWSER:

Let me step up on my soapbox for a sec. MSNBC is treading lightly on traditional standards of journalism. Ron Reagan will address the Democratic convention tonight, speaking on the topic of stem cell research. Two hours later, he will co-anchor an MSNBC talk show. Does anyone else feel queasy about this?

Reagan was on Hardball at 6 (then left at 6:30 for speech prep). He will grant Chris Matthews an “exclusive interview” immediately after the speech, this press release says. Reagan is an “MSNBC political analyst,” so isn’t MSNBC paying for this “exclusive interview?” And he is more than an “analyst” — he is a show host (After Hours), a “special correspondent” (reporting live across from the “free speech zone” on MSNBC Sunday), and an interviewer (Michael Moore, yesterday).

Democratic activist, member of the mainstream media — what’s the difference? “Let’s talk a little media bias here. The media, I think, wants Kerry to win.” Evan Thomas set the stage for this whole election, I think. But if Kerry’s already enjoying the 15-point media-induced edge that Thomas predicted, then he’s running a really weak campaign. . . .

On the other (non-journalistic) hand, Ron Reagan’s convention speech is praised here.

BETH MAULDIN: “I loved listening to Mr. Obama and hope like hell if he’s elected to the Senate it doesn’t suck the life out of him.”

UPDATE: More here: “Barack Obama gave a fine speech, but it was not a speech that reflects the current Democratic Party.”

But Howard Dean gets a bad review: “going through the motions in a flat performance that should make Hillary Clinton and John Edwards rest easy.”

More on Dean: “Could Dean not find even one nice thing to say about John Kerry? Apparently not. The overwhelming impression that a viewer gets from this convention so far: The only candidate that gets this convention excited is George Bush.”

Matthew Gross: “Of course, all the journalists have a full copy already. Do you see the man behind the curtain yet?”

MORE: Another reader emails:

I have to say, Obama impressed me tonight. He is definetly articluate and a bright star for the democrats. His “One America” speech resulted in a standing ovation from the delegates. However, one must think that Edwards will receive a similar ovation with his more divisive “Two Americas” speech tomorrow night. So which is it: Two Americas or One America? I’m confused. I guess Obama didn’t get the memo about class warfare. It really shows the current problem of the Democratic party.

Indeed. Teresa Heinz Kerry gets a less-warm review:

Not terrible, I guess — but she was Schoenberg and we want our conventions to be Bruce Springsteen. OK, she was early Schoenberg — not atonal, but astringent and chromatic and lugubrious. I don’t know — I’m not sure speechifying is really her event.

Dean didn’t have much of a speech but had some fire, Ron Reagan was OK, Obama had flashes of brilliance at the end but isn’t Clinton yet. I have hopes for Elizabeth Edwards. I bet my mom will like her.

Probably so.

SELF-REFUTING SPIN: The goofy Kerry NASA photos have drawn this response: “Cahill, asked by FOXNEWS whether it was a dirty trick, said: ‘Well, what do you think?’ No photos were supposed to be taken, she said.”

But if you follow the link, you’ll see Kerry obviously posing for photos. His campaign folks blew it, and now they’re only making it worse.

UPDATE: How out of touch is the Kerry campaign? A bunch of these pictures were made public on the Kennedy Space Center website. As reader David Mayer emails: “Just scroll on past the (pretty cool) MESSENGER stuff, and there’s a series of official Bunny Senator photos. It’s pretty hard not to look dumb in a suit like this; that’s why few people have them in their wardrobe. But pretending that it’s all a dirty trick is very avoidably stupid.”

“Avoidably stupid.” Not much of a campaign style. Perhaps they’ll do better. But hey, not everybody thinks it’s stupid. Reader Bill McLane emails: “What a genius this guy is! Who else would have cleverly gone for the bee keeper vote?”

It wouldn’t have crossed my mind.

MORE: Now this, on the other hand, is just wrong.

STILL MORE: Tom Maguire: “Maybe ‘the campaign’ had no idea that there would be any photographs, but Kerry must have known – what did he think was happening when the four people gathered together and smiled? Who is he smiling at in the other photos ? . . . C’mon, there are cameras everywhere. Kerry should not let his campaign manager go out and embarrass herself this way.”

MORE STILL: Reader Ted Armstrong emails:

If Kerry had any sense of humor, he’d make fun of the photos himself. If I were he, I’d put one in my speech and then have a humorous comment to say about it. It would take a lot away from his aloofness. But I don’t expect them to take my advice .

That would have been much better than lame assertions of dirty tricks.

FINAL UPDATE: Howard Kurtz has more on this story:

But Kennedy Space Center spokesman Mike Rein said a video was routinely made of Kerry “as we have done for the last 40 years.” He said NASA takes such footage because Kerry was in “a very confined and hazardous area” and that the pictures are always made public.

I thought we were supposed to be for openness in government.

THESE THINGS JUST WRITE THEMSELVES: Reader David Hines emails:

Suggested TV commercial:

FADE IN: on Ted Kennedy, on the podium, partway through his garbled
convention speech, as he delivers the line, “The only thing we have to
fear is four more years of George W. Bush!”

CUT TO: New York City skyline. The old one. With the World Trade
Center.

TITLE/ANNOUNCER: Really?

Ouch. And Rand Simberg observes: “If Karl Rove is smart, the Republican convention will feature some grateful Iraqis in prime time, just as a reminder.”

UPDATE: Another Kennedy goof here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader suggests this image.

ANNENBERG’S FACTCHECK.ORG has this to say on the “sixteen words” imbroglio: “He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn’t Lying. Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.”

Joe Wilson, once again, comes off badly.

DANIEL DREZNER is unhappy that outsourcing is going to be a major Democratic theme between now and November. (Here’s his Foreign Affairs article on why it’s not a big deal).

Well, I warned people about this over a year ago. Here’s Dan Pink’s piece from Wired on the subject, and I’ve also written about the topic here (invoking the documentary Spellbound). Plus, this New Republic piece by Clay Risen is worth reading: “While offshoring may displace some workers in the short term, in the medium and long terms it represents a net benefit for both domestic businesses and their workers. In fact, the greatest threat from outsourcing is that its opponents will use it to force a new wave of protectionism.”

INTERESTING STORY on blogs from The Hollywood Reporter.

PEER TO PEER NETWORKS can be a security threat. On See What You Share, examples of military and other information found on peer networks are posted as a way of bringing attention to the subject.

ALEX TABARROK NOTES that the Patriot Act seems not to be doing much useful work.

UPDATE: It said “Tyler Cowen” above — I had forgotten to check. Darn that group-blog confusion!

ANOTHER UPDATE: Orin Kerr says Tabarrok is factually wrong in his examples.

LOTS OF WEB PROBLEMS because of the latest MyDoom variant. Don’t forget to check out the InstaBackup site if this one goes down.

CONVENTION BLOGGER DAVE WEINBERGER COMMENTS ON STYLE:

I went to a “get-together” for people involved in various of the Kerry policy initiatives. (Disclosure: I’m on some sort of mailing list for people with opinions about tech policy.) In contrast to the standing, crying, clapping crowd at the Dean/Moore event, this one was women in dark suits and guys in khakis. (Hint: If Kerry looks like he’s going to win, invest in khaki shares. Through the roof, I tell you!) And, yes, they were serving petit-fours. Would Dean show up in Birkenstocks? Would Bush strap on a six-shooter? Would Cheney grow a handlebar moustache? Then Kerry’s policy advisory get-together shouldn’t serve petit-fours.

Hmm. Are there khaki futures I can buy now?

HMM — THIS IS INTERESTING:

A major American Muslim charity and seven of its officers were charged Tuesday with providing millions of dollars in support to Hamas, a Palestinian terrorist organization blamed for dozens of suicide bomber attacks in Israel. . . .

The indictment names the foundation along with its president, Shukri Abu Baker; chairman, Ghassan Elashi; executive director, Haitham Maghawri; and four others. The charges include conspiracy, providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization, tax evasion and money laundering.

No real surprise, but I’m sure some people will question the timing. (Via Michelle Malkin, who has much more information).

UPDATE: Bill Hobbs notes that the Holy Land Foundation controls Iraq’s internet domain, which is quite odd. Evidence that all these guys work together?

ABORTION AND CLASS: Earlier, I noted how Ann Althouse critiqued Barbara Ehrenreich’s invocation of “grubby lower-class” lifestyles in her piece defending her abortion. Likewise, this widely-derided piece by Amy Richards about aborting two of her three triplets famously invoked similar concerns: “When I found out about the triplets, I felt like: It’s not the back of a pickup at 16, but now I’m going to have to move to Staten Island. I’ll never leave my house because I’ll have to care for these children. I’ll have to start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise.”

I’m pro-choice, and I don’t think that superficial-seeming reasons for exercising one’s freedom are necessarily arguments against that freedom. (I think you should be able to have an assault weapon or an abortion, regardless of whether others think you need one.) But the snippy upper-middle-class tones of both Ehrenreich and Richards say something about the pro-choice movement, and the larger women’s movement. Something about a kind of economic aspiration, coupled with snobbery, that seems rather unattractive, and largely unexamined. Considering bien pensant attitudes toward snobbery and economic aspiration among, say, Republicans, that’s kind of interesting.

It turns out that there are other interesting factors — and perhaps even economic ones — regarding that Times piece.

UPDATE: A reader suggests reading this from Slate, too.

AN EX-GIRLFRIEND TURNED INSTAPUNDIT CORRESPONDENT (yeah, I’ll recruit ’em any way I can) emails this report:

I took these photos at today’s Kerry rally in Norfolk, and no, I haven’t turned into a Democrat. I was accompanying one of my young workers – he’s a Kerry fan. Just because you’re my former sweetie, I am sending you the first pic. Look closely at the foreground in the first photo – they inadvertently set the platform up in front of the French flag!!!

There’s a lot of that inadvertence stuff going around.

UPDATE: Or is it the French flag? Close examination shows that it’s flying from a flagpole on the left, but then the colors are wrong — it should be blue, white, red from left to right. Reader Wallace Winfrey, who’s been trying to find it on Google, emails: “It’s the mystery flag!” Go figure. Meanwhile my Norfolk correspondent sends this update:

The Norfolk rally was so poorly executed, it’s hard to believe it’s leading up to the convention. There was almost no advance work done – obviously stage placement was off, there was a cheesy-looking fake plant at the podium, the speeches leading up to Kerry were looooong and boring, the crowd was fairly sparse and wasn’t inspired to cheer much – they threw a few t-shirts from the stage to try to rev them up. That worked for a couple of minutes. The Bush supporters were loud for their size, and appeared to be more enthusiastic. It was really kind of a bust, considering that the convention is going on this week.

It’s shocking: Apparently, the Kerry advance team handled things so badly that they screwed up the French flag! That’s not going to do much to heal the transatlantic rift. . . .

ANOTHER UPDATE: Several readers say that it’s the signal flag for the letter “T” or “Tango” — and it does look right. But why would they be flying that flag at a Kerry rally, even if it is on a Naval base? Is there a French connection somewhere?

The answer comes from No Caliban: “The easiest mnemonic for the flag was, of course, Last Tango in Paris.” Makes sense to me! Another mystery explained in record time, thanks to the miracle of the blogosphere!

MORE: The information keeps coming. A reader informs me that it wasn’t actually on a naval base:

The event wasn’t actually held on any of the military installations in the area – that’s actually prohibited by law (overt political campaigning -if an incumbent can wrangle a legitimate function at a military base, that’s a whole nother story). This rally was at a place called Nauticus (link), a maritime themed museum in downtown Norfolk (actually, not too far, but on the other side of some water, from the PETA main HQ building…).

From the Instagirlfriend picture, it looks like they set up the stage between the Nauticus facility building and the battleship, parked right next to it. The ship which, while still on the US Naval registry of ships, is not on active status. It’s pseudo-carefully mothballed – the public isn’t allowed to climb through it, just on the main deck and through a couple of carefully selected outer areas. From the looks of it, they were down in the little unused ‘no-man’s land’ – it’s actually a pretty cramped little space – the USSS guys probably loved it because it is hidden from view by just about everything. Not a lot of room though – it’s barely wider than a good sized alley, but it does have the advantage of offering camera angles that include the tips of 16 inch Naval Guns. The fact that the ship is still an official US Navy vessel (unlike, say, the USS Alabama in Mobile) is probably why the rally wasn’t on the ship itself, which offers a LOT more space on the fantail than the little alleyway where Kerry actually was.

From my recollection of the overall size of the area, I’d be surprised if the overall spectator head count for the event was over 2-300 people – there just isn’t any room for more than that. I’ve noticed looking through the Google/Yahoo news photos of the event that there aren’t any wide angle crowd shots – probably because there wasn’t much of a crowd. I also noticed that none of the shots give a clear indication, like the one you got hold of, about how dinky the venue they used really is (overall size wise). She mentions the ‘cheesy plant’ – and ‘cheesy plant’ appears in a lot of the ‘candidate on the stump’ pix. Another indication of how small the place is, if one frikkin plant is good enough for camouflage!

Yeah, if you look at pictures like this one you get a very different sense of the locale. Well, here’s another picture she sent, with a panoramic view. (Click it for a bigger version). I’d guess it’s more than 2-300 people, but not a lot more. And it’s Insta-ex-girlfriend, as we haven’t been an item since some time in the Reagan administration. But as I’ve mentioned before, I stay in touch. The old boys’ network has nothing on the old girlfriend network!

STILL MORE: Reader Will Roden — who clearly needs a hobby — emails:

I count 105 people in the picture, not including the sniper on the roof or the man walking by the news trucks. It looks like a good portion of the attendees are blocked from view by the tree. Based on the density of the crowd, I’ll guess that there are no more than 70 people behind it. I wonder how many in the crowd are media and other campaign staff.

10 minutes of studying this picture, and I still haven’t found Waldo.

I haven’t verified this count myself, and don’t plan to. . . .

UH-OH — looks like the Evil Empire might be back.

HERE’S A ROUNDUP ON STEM-CELL POLITICS — an issue on which the Democrats are clearly superior, in my opinion, to the Republicans. And they seem to think so, too: “In the runup to the US presidential election in November, the Democrats are positioning themselves as the party of stem cell research.”

MORE CONVENTION-BLOGGING:

Had a Boston taxi driver yesterday from Iraq. He’s going back home to visit his parents in a few weeks. He was none-too-pleased with the Democrats. He believes that Democrats hate his country and want Saddam to be back in power. He was adamant that things are much better in Iraq than the media is saying … and he’s at a loss as to why all of these media types won’t tell the truth.

I can’t imagine why that would be.

Meanwhile OxBlog’s Patrick Belton — as part of a long tick-tock account of yesterday — observes:

I discuss the hidden messages being conveyed by all of the veteran symbology with the delegate next to me. We decide the message transmitted by all of the invocation of veterans is:

Vietnam=Iraq
mendacious government at the time of Vietnam = Bush
speaking the truth to power = veterans, Kerry, and RFK

This, of course, puts the Democratic back on the solid and successful footing of the Chicago convention of 1968.

Ouch. He calls Clinton’s speech “brilliant,” though, and notes that many delegates wish Clinton could run again. And James Taranto calls Gore’s speech “probably the best speech he’s ever given.” Clinton/Gore in ’04!

MORE: Several readers think that I’m reading Taranto wrong, and they may be right. Here’s the quote:

Gore’s speech was almost as levelheaded–though nowhere near as memorable–as his Dec. 13, 2000, concession, probably the best speech he’s ever given.

On second reading, I think they’re right, and he’s saying that the concession speech was the best speech he’s ever given, which would make this the second best speech.

Hey, that’s not bad. In the words of Buzz Aldrin from The Simpsons: “Second comes right after first, you know!”

A KERRY IRAQ VIDEO? Where could they have gotten that idea?

CHRIS MUIR’S DAY BY DAY would make a nice counterpoint to Doonesbury on editorial pages. I hope he gets a syndication deal, though I suspect that they’re not going to want to give him a lot of exposure before the election.

NETWORK RATINGS ARE IN “FREE FALL” over convention coverage. Bloggers have been watching. I wonder if blog traffic is up?

MY PLEASURE-READING has been somewhat constrained lately, as I’m reading a lot more for work. But I enjoyed Richard Morgan’s Altered Carbon — a sort of cyber-noir story — very much, so I ordered the sequel, Broken Angel, though so far (I’m only about 50 pages in) it’s not quite as good. It’s also dedicated to John Pilger, though the bad guys are the U.N. — depicted as an institution run by greedy moneyed interests who foment violence for their own nefarious purposes. Not entirely implausible, actually. . . .

THE NEW YORK TIMES: Running scared? Maybe.