Time for a Change

Newsweek's cover is Obama & Hillary: Is America ready for either one of them? Here's the best single-sentence argument I've seen in the affirmative:

"The record of white males in high places has not exactly been stellar of late, and voters might be in the mood to try something historic and possibly redemptive."

I raised this issue of Barack Obama's land deal with a Chicagoan named Tony Rezko last week, and The Post's print edition got to it yesterday. Obama calls his mistake "boneheaded." Will it hurt him? Slate's John Dickerson doesn't think so:

"There's no evidence that the senator is fibbing or that the indicted fund-raiser asked anything in return for his neighborly behavior (though that might have been just a matter of time). Obama hasn't tried to change his story, even though Rezko is now talking to investigators.

"What about Obama's judgment? Chicago politicians with national aspirations have to think a little harder about appearances than their colleagues from other cities that don't have reputations for corruption. Shouldn't Obama have known not to get anywhere near a sketchy character like Rezko?

"When Obama bought his house, Rezko was not as radioactive as he is today. Newspaper accounts contained allegations about his business practices, but he was regarded as a typical power broker who cannily cultivates politicians. But by the time that Obama bought the strip of land, Rezko was glowing. The papers were reporting that he was under investigation by federal prosecutors. In October, he was charged in a 24-count indictment with trying to obtain kickbacks from companies seeking state business.

"Obama presents himself as a squeaky-clean politician, so the dubious association with Rezko has caused him more trouble that it would, say, anyone else in the history of Chicago or Illinois politics. To diffuse the issue, the junior senator has done a good John McCain imitation: swamping critics with apologies, admissions, and candor . . .

"The Rezko business is also not likely to hurt him, because his principal rival will probably be Hillary Clinton, and she's not going to bring up the topic of questionable land deals."

One possible distraction Hillary won't be able to ignore: Bill Clinton.

Why did Evan Bayh drop out 13 days after forming his exploratory committee? (It came, it explored, it gave up.) Dick Polman attributes it to the two politicians on Newsweek's cover:

"Apparently he decided to take a bye on '08 after realizing that he would not be able to compete for money and media buzz -- not just with Hillary, but with the rapidly ascendant Barack Obama.

"No doubt Bayh realized this last weekend, when he found himself stumping in New Hampshire at the same time as Obama, and drew roughly as much attention as a panhandler in midtown Manhattan.