Given Ann Coulter's "faggot" remark at the CPAC conference yesterday, it's probably worth recalling the bomb she dropped at last year's CPAC event:

Referring to Iran, Coulter said, "What if they start having one of these bipolar episodes with nuclear weapons? I think our motto should be, post-9/11, 'Raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'"

Here's the question in a nutshell. Why is it that one of the central draws at the year's premiere gathering of conservatives is basically a child in the body of a "controversial" pundit?

In the session after Romney, Ann Coulter used an anti-gay slur to describe John Edwards (the line drew applause) and asked: "Did Al Gore actually swallow Michael Moore?" When a questioner asked Coulter why she praises marriage but broke off so many engagements, she responded by calling the questioner ugly.

And why is it that this conference's attendees are actually willing to take valuable time out of their brief lives in order to witness such infantilism?

The conference drew thousands of attendees, many of whom waited in a long line out the door for a late-afternoon appearance by Ann Coulter, the conservative author and commentator.

Why? Why? Why?

We admit it: On this one, we're completely stumped. Can anyone help us out?

So here's the Edwards campaign's response to Ann Coulter's observation yesterday at CPAC that John Edwards is a "faggot": He's raising "Coulter Cash" off of her slur.

In an email that went out in the late evening yesterday to supporters and contributors, Edwards campaign manager David Bonior asked for help raising $100,000 in a week as a reply to Coulter. Bonior wrote:

Help us raise $100,000 in "Coulter Cash" this week to show every would-be Republican mouthpiece that their bigoted attacks will not intimidate this campaign. I just threw in 100 bucks. Will you join me?

The Web page where donors can chip in their own "Coulter Cash" is here.

Bonior's full email after the jump.

Read more »

The only speaker today who matched or outdid Rudy Giuliani in applause and adoration at today's Conservative Political Action Conference was Mitt Romney. Here are some video highlights.

Watch Mitt's wife Ann take a moment to recognize their upcoming 38th wedding anniversary — in one fell swoop skillfully deflating both the Mormom/polygamy issue and calling attention to the other candidates' multiple marriages:

Watch Romney bash the state he was Governor of only months ago, praise Ann Coulter, and attack the media — all in the space of one minute:

Watch Romney bash the state he'd pledged to serve yet again, this time describing it as "San Francisco East, Nancy Pelosi-style:"

Watch Romney use Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid as foils for trying to undermine the surge:

Okay, so here's the state of play in the House right now with regard to the coming showdown between Congressional Dems and the White House over the war.

The House GOP leadership has now unveiled its response to the news this morning that House Dems are coming together behind an approach to the soon-to-be-voted-on spending bill that would bring the troops home if the Iraqi government fails to reduce violence there. House GOP leaders say that if Dems try to attach any conditions to the war spending bill, Republicans in the House may vote against it:

The House minority leader threatened Thursday to get his members to vote against a $96.3 billion spending bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if Democrats persist in plans to attach conditions to the money that would tell President Bush how to conduct the wars.

This is interesting -- now it's the House Republican leadership who is threatening to vote against funding the troops. The same Republican leadership which, behind House GOP leader John Boehner, has been demanding that Dems show full support for funding the troops, lest they be accused of not supporting them:

REP. BOEHNER: Let’s have a real resolution on the floor. It’s a bill that says, “We will not cut the funding for our troops in harms’ way.”

Meanwhile, Hill sources tell us that it may be days before Congressional Dems seriously coalesce behind the current approach in any case.

The sources say that it's very likely that the current approach won't be drawn up in the form of a bill until another Caucus meeting is held, because the new approach has yet to be run in detail by rank and file House Dems. Another Caucus meeting can't be held until early next week, so it could be days before we see a final bill, though if consensus emerges quickly a bill could be drafted and directed into the appropriations process within a few days.

Meanwhile, multiple sources tell us that negotiations are ongoing over the approach and that the situation is very fluid. One source who's in touch with Congressional staff says that the leadership is considering attaching a new bill by Dem Rep. Howard Berman to the supplemental spending bill. Berman's legislation, called the Iraqi Benchmark Act, would stipulate that if the "surge" doesn't measure up to the benchmarks articulated by the President himself, an "immediate redeployment" would be mandated. "The leadership is thinking about embracing this," the source says.

In other words, stay tuned until next week.

So that's where we are.

This is kind of funny. Today GOP House leader John Boehner put out a statement attacking the House Dem leadership's latest plan to scale back the American presence in Iraq. Here's the rather startling title on Boehner's release:

Boehner Statement on House Democrats’ Latest Plan for America’s Global War on Terror

But, no, actually, the plan is for Iraq, not for the "Global War on Terror." Are these people for real?

Mitt Romney's efforts to reach the conservative base are apparently working — that is, if Ann Coulter's view of things is any indication. After Romney's speech at CPAC today, Coulter essentially threw Romney her endorsement in a Q and A session with the audience, saying: "I think he's probably our best candidate."

The best part, though, was her main reason for backing Romney — because he's a good liar:

"But you have to say about Romney, he tricked liberals into voting for him," Coulter said. "I like a guy who hoodwinks liberals so easily."

Also interesting: She garnered massive applause from the conservative audience when she ridiculed the other candidates, which should be a source of concern for them all.

On Rudy: "But when this country gets to the point where both presidential candidates support abortion, I think we can hang it up as a country."

On McCain: "McCain, I think has some problems, because everyone who supports McCain would have to switch party registrations to vote for him."

On Gingrich: "We don't even know if he's running for President, but assuming he is, I kind of think his time has passed. I don't know, it could come back again — like 80's music — but I think his time is over."

“It’s still George Bush’s war. But we run the risk of gaining some ownership of it if we don’t make it absolutely clear that we are the party that wants to get out of there.”

-- Senator Russ Feingold, quoted by The New York Times explaining why Congressional Dems shouldn't consider measures that would give Bush any leeway to continue the war.

Lots of pundits were anticipating Rudy Giuliani's speech today before the Conservative Political Action Conference as a key moment in his Presidential run — an appearance that would offer the first real look at whether the socially liberal Rudy can get passed his differences with social conservatives by focusing on their common ground on national security, taxes and other issues.

So, how did he do? Here are some video highlights:

Watch Rudy respond to a joke from George Will about Margaret Thatcher's handbag by accidentally — or intentionally? — alluding to his old gimmick of dressing up in women's clothing:

Watch Rudy try to deal with his single biggest deviation from conservative orthodoxy — abortion — by quoting conservative patron saint Ronald Reagan saying "My 80% ally is not my 20% enemy," and even better, "I don't agree with myself on everything":

Watch Rudy focus on that 80% of alleged agreement with conservatives, often to great applause, by pandering furiously to the audience with the false claim that Democrats oppose legal wiretaps of terrorists (and don't miss the obligatory reference to France):

howard berman thing. howard berman is introducing a think called the iraq benchmarks act. what I'm hearing is that there are at least some in leadership are thinking that it will become part of the supplemental...it's basically would apply the benchmarks that bush talked about when he outlined the escalatoni. it woud say, ok, you have to report that iraq gove is making subst progress in meeting these benchmarks. and explain. he would also have to determine in reducing sect violence. doesn't say anythingn about a time fraime. got to show benchmarks towards...prog towards benchmarks he layd out. if they can't do it...I'm told that one of the,

it's being considered righ now. one of the ideas being thought about is that...no one knows what's going on...supposedly leadership is thinking about is embracing this act and incorp that into the supplemental if not in committee if not on the floor. it's not claer but it looks like the murtha stuff is getting watered down...they should just...almost to make it a straight supplemental...staffers on relevant committees...

Here are a few updates on the movements of the Presidential candidates:

* As of Friday morning, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain and Rep. Duncan Hunter are locked in a dead heat in the Spartanburg County, South Carolina Presidential straw poll. Giuliani led the tally Thursday night, but continued counting this morning has closed the gap. Final numbers are supposed to be released Friday afternoon.

* Ben Smith reports on a private Hillary gathering with a gay group that for some reason wasn't on her public schedule.

* Former Sen. Rick Santorum, who was recently signed by Fox News to be a contributor, told the Politico yesterday that of the GOP field, the "only one I wouldn’t support is [Sen. John] McCain."

* Rudy Giuliani announced today that Patrick Oxford will serve as the chairman of his Presidential exploratory committee. Oxford is currently the Managing Partner of Bracewell & Giuliani, LLP and is active in Houston and Texas civic affairs.

* CPAC continues today. On the day's agenda are Rep. Duncan Hunter, Sen. James Inhofe, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. Arlen Specter, Rep. Mike Pence and Ann Coulter. Live-blogging from a conservative POV is Robert Bluey and from a liberal POV is Campus Progress.

* On the heels of news that he is push-polling in Iowa, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore is planning to launch attack ads tomorrow via YouTube and his own website that accuse GOP frontrunners Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney of not sharing "conservative values." Gilmore even echoes DNC head Howard Dean in the ad, describing himself as representing "the Republican wing of the Republican Party."

* Mitt Romney pointedly took shots at both Rudy Giuliani and John McCain yesterday while speaking in New Hampshire. Romney told a crowd of voters that McCain was setting the "wrong course" for the country with his immigration policy while making sure to point out that Giuliani held liberal positions on gay rights, abortion and gun control.

More after the jump.

Read more »

Forget the Dixie Chicks's Bush-bashing — this one's really going to get a rise out of the right-wingers in country radio.

Merle Haggard — the country music giant who helped launch the genre's über-patriotism with his classics "The Fightin' Side Of Me," and "Okie From Muskogee" — has just recorded a new song: A tribute to Hillary! Billboard reports that the song, which is entitled "Hillary," has praiseworthy lyrics such as: "This country needs to be honest/This country needs to be large/Something like a big switch of gender/Let's put a woman in charge."

This isn't the first time that Haggard has done stuff sure to rile the right. He publicly defended the Dixie Chicks after they came under fire for bashing Bush, and recently wrote a song with the lyrics: "Yea, men in position but backing away/Freedom is stuck in reverse/Let's get out of Iraq and get back on the track/And let's rebuild America first."

But a country music ode to Hillary? That seems like new ground. "Never before in history has there ever been a woman anyone seriously thought to be a possible candidate for president," Haggard told the mag, adding that Clinton's camp has been in touch with his representatives about the song, which he's recorded but has yet to release. So we may be hearing the actual song — and lots of talk about it — very soon.

murtha and pelosi want some tough shit...

it's not so much a question of who's advo for what rather than...the feeling was they didnt have the votes for the murtha thing...debate could be had that you go out and try to get the votes. I think it was kind of a cons that we didn't ... even for straight passage...it would have been some of the blue dogs, especially the moderate freshman people...again, I dont think they did a precise vote tally...the rep attacks put the fear of god into some people...

they come from rahm. if you go back and look at that, they had the findings from the wapo poll...you'll notice that poling on murtha plan was left out, whereas the poling on maliki stuff was highlighted...

one might deduce that that's rahm's pet push...

my guess is, from what I heard at the last caucus meeting, was hugely raucus. there were so many people that were scared of it...I would't be surprised if he made that point...dccc people went there, everybody was yelling...it was herding cats like crazy...

negotiations are ongoing over the ... some not all...that's being batted around...

exactly...

basically, even the fluid ting that's there, the leaders have come up with this...not been run byt he entier caucus...that's why the meeting is necessary...pelosi, hoyer, murtha, rahm and skelton...

So it looks as if House Dem leaders are close to a compromise on an approach to confronting President Bush on Iraq.

They appear to be nearing some sort of consensus around an approach that would allow Bush to send unprepared troops to Iraq with a waiver, but would also require that troops are out of Iraq are out in six months if the Iraqi government doesn't reach certain goals in reducing the violence there. From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders have coalesced around legislation that would require troops to come home from Iraq within six months if that country's leaders fail to meet promises to help reduce violence there, party officials said Thursday.

The plan would retain a Democratic proposal prohibiting the deployment to Iraq of troops with insufficient rest or training or who already have served there for more than a year. Under the plan, such troops could only be sent to Iraq if President Bush waives those standards and reports to Congress each time.

The proposal is the latest attempt by Democrats to resolve deep divisions within the party on how far to go to scale back U.S. involvement in Iraq. Rep. James Moran said the latest version has the support of party leadership and said he believes it is final and has the best chance at attracting broad support....

If the Iraqis fail to live up to their promises, some troops could be left behind under the Democrats' plan to train Iraqi troops or conduct counterterrorism missions, Moran said.

Many questions remain, of course. How many troops would have to be out of Iraq in six months if the Iraqi government fails to fulfill its "promises"? How do we decide if the vaguely defined goal of "reducing the violence" has been met? Who decides if it has or hasn't been met? More soon.

A new poll finds that Dem Presidential hopeful Joe Biden is losing in his home state -- he's running second behind Hillary Clinton. According to Delaware's News Journal, the poll of registered Delaware Democrats by Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind center found Hillary leading with 34%, Biden second at 21%, followed by Barack Obama at 19% and John Edwards at 10%.

Key number: Although Biden is viewed favorably by 60% of respondents, only 47% think he'd make a good President.

Buried in the big New York Times poll released late yesterday is a number showing that a solid majority would be willing to pay higher taxes in exchange for government-guaranteed health care for all.

Respondents were asked the following question: "Would you be willing or not willing to pay higher taxes so that all Americans have health insurance that they can't lose no matter what?" Sixty percent said they were willing, while only 34% said the were not.

This is the second poll in a few weeks reporting such a finding. Last month a Quinnipiac University poll found that 53% would pay higher taxes for such a guarantee, while only 42% said no. All the Dem Presidential candidates have made a call for universal health care a part of their platform in some form or others; John Edwards has called for higher taxes to fulfill this goal, a move some commentators claim is risky. These numbers would seem to suggest that it isn't as risky as it seems.

With Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama duking it out for black voters, the Hillary campaign is rolling out its howitzer: Bill Clinton.

The former President will join Hillary this Sunday at a celebration of the 1965 civil rights march in Selma, Alabama -- even as Obama gives the keynote speech at the event, today's Washington Post reports.

It will be Bill's first major campaign appearance for Hillary since she launched her campaign last month. Polls show Obama has gained significantly among African American voters, among whom the former President is still extremely popular.

Meanwhile, speaking of Hillary and the 1960s, MSNBC has gotten its hands on her 1969 senior thesis -- something that her critics have long sought to uncover. More on this a bit later.

The Dem Senate leadership is still struggling to unite around an approach to confronting President Bush on the war -- and the lack of consensus is stopping the Senate from moving forward with a proposal that would have repealed the 2002 resolution giving Bush the authority to invade Iraq, New York Times reports:

The plan put off some Democrats, because it said explicitly that “the president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United States in Iraq” for the purposes of protecting American forces and bases, training Iraqi soldiers and policemen, conducting operations against terrorists and protecting Iraq’s borders.

Critics of the war, particularly those who opposed the 2002 authorization, worried that this approach would effectively put them on record as sanctioning almost any use Mr. Bush and his commanders might make of the troops, giving Democrats shared responsibility for a war that most of them now oppose and several have rejected all along.

Senator Russell Feingold puts it all in very clear perspective: “It’s still George Bush’s war,” he told the paper, “but we run the risk of gaining some ownership of it if we don’t make it absolutely clear that we are the party that wants to get out of there.”

It looks as if Rudy Giuliani may be starting to take on the status of official frontrunner in the GOP primary.

There are two signs of this: A new poll out today showing unexpected strength for Rudy; and a new round of attacks on him from Mitt Romney, who's trailing in most polls.

First, the poll: The Time magazine survey showed that Giuliani now leads his closest rival, John McCAin, by 14 points, 38%-24%, among registered Republicans. In January, another Time poll showed McCain up four -- meaning there's been a 18 point swing in the mag's poll. Rudy has a 50% to 23% advantage over McCain in the Northeast -- but is even leading McCain by five points in the west, the poll says.

Meanwhile, Romney has launched a new, all-out attack on Rudy, provoking a dust-up between the two campaigns, ABC News reports:

"He is pro-choice, he is pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun," said former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., in an interview taped in Boston on Feb. 28. "That's a tough combination in a Republican primary."

Giuliani is often described as being "pro-gay rights" because he signed 1997 bill creating domestic-partnership benefits in New York City. He has never, however, been "pro-gay marriage."...

"It is sad," a source close to the Giuliani campaign told ABC News, "but unfortunately not surprising, that Mitt Romney's flailing campaign has chosen to misrepresent Rudy's positions. He can't keep his own positions straight let alone Rudy's."

Meanwhile, Rudy tomorrow will give a speech before the Conservative Political Action Conference -- something that national bigfoot pundits will be watching closely to see whether he'll be able to "connect" with conservatives despite his social liberalism.

A remarkable new poll finds slightly more respondents favor Congressional defunding of the entire Iraq war than favor continued funding. The new Fox News poll asked a stark question, devoid of any nuance: "If you were a member of Congress, would you vote for continued funding of the Iraq war or would you vote against funding the war altogether to try to force a withdrawal?" Forty-five percent said they'd vote against funding, while 44% said they'd vote to fund the war. While this is a virtual tie, it suggests that the political atmosphere is far more favorably disposed towards Congressional defunding of the war — or at least the escalation — than the conventional wisdom of commentators, and the actions thus far by Congressional Democrats, would suggest.

Here are a few updates on the movements of the Presidential candidates:

* When he speaks to the Chicago office of American Israel Public Affairs Committee tomorrow, Sen. Barack Obama will lay out his vision for Israel and the Middle East by calling for tougher Iran sanctions, more bilateral diplomacy and declaring that he is for leaving all military options on the table. Both Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton will host private receptions for AIPAC members when the organization meets on March 11 for its annual policy conference.

* The Conservative Political Action Conference kicked off this morning. Speakers on today's agenda include Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Sen. Jim DeMint, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, Sen. Arlen Specter, former UN Ambassador John Bolton and the big cheese, Vice President Dick Cheney. Every Presidential candidate except for John McCain is set to address the conference at some point over the next three days.

* Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani picked up the endorsement of former Solicitor General Ted Olson today. Olson is well known as the man who represented George W. Bush before the Supreme Court in the Bush V. Gore case that decided the 2000 election.

* Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, who recently ended his run for President, told a local Iowa TV station that "the chances are good" that he will endorse one of the Democratic candidates, but not before he meets with them individually.

* Rep. Duncan Hunter has cut ties with two recently-hired South Carolina advisers, former GOP lieutenant governor candidate Henry Jordan and Horry County Auditor Lois Eargle, after their history of inflammatory comments towards immigrants and religious minorities were brought to light.

More after the jump.

Read more »

John McCain apologies for saying during his announcement on David Letterman's show last night that America lives had been "wasted" in Iraq:

"Last evening, I referred to American casualties in Iraq as wasted. I should have used the word sacrificed, as I have in the past. No one appreciates and honors more than I do the selfless patriotism of American servicemen and women in the Iraq War. We owe them a debt we can never fully repay. And America's leaders owe them, as well as the American people, our best judgment and honest appraisal of the progress of the war, in which they continue to sacrifice."

Full statement here.

Update: ABC News points out that McCain's statement doesn't contain an apology.

Mitt Romney has come up with a novel way of "proving" that he's the real conservative in the race: He now says that you can tell that this is the case because the media's out to get him.

In an interview with Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network, Romney was asked to account for the media's treatment of his inconsistencies on various social issues. His response:

"I think it proves that the media has determined who the conservative candidate is, because they're going after me with hammer and tong and that's the way you would expect to go after the conservative candidate," he said. "I'm proud of the fact that the mainstream media isn't wild about my candidacy and that's why I'm going to win."

Incidentally, Romney also offered some intriguing push-back to the charge that he's been inconsistent on abortion and gay rights: No one can actually point to any real inconsistencies. Romney:

"That's the sort of thing that opponents are going to try and push," Romney explained. "Then you ask them to be more specific and they have a hard time being more specific. Or if they are specific it's on an item of such insignificance that you say of course I've changed my view on that. I've learned from experience."

Critics have a "hard time being more specific" on Romney's inconsistencies? Maybe we can help. Examples can be found here, here, and here.

Here's another flip-flop on abortion from Rudy Giuliani, who's steadily moving to the right on the issue to appeal to the social conservatives who drive GOP primaries. This time Rudy's has shifted on the issue of public funding for abortion.

Check out what a top Rudy Giuliani adviser just said to the National Review about Rudy's stance on the issue:

On the issue of abortion, Simon focused on Giuliani’s recent comments on judges. When pressed — what is a pro-lifer like Simon doing flacking for an abortion-rights advocate? — and asked if he had any assurance that Giuliani wouldn’t support taxpayer-funded abortion as president, Simon told National Review Online, "I have an assurance that he is in favor of the Hyde amendment" (which forbids such taxpayer subsidies).

But here's how The New York Times described Rudy's position on the issue on June 18, 1993 (via Nexis):

Leaflets distributed by the Giuliani campaign at the morning program said that he opposes restrictions to Federal Medicaid financing for abortions and opposes the Hyde Amendment, which is intended to deny support for that financing.

We're seeking comment from Rudy's campaign on his reversal. Incidentally, Rudy has also flip-flopped on another key abortion question: Whether he backs late-term abortion. Now we have two flip-flops and counting.

Rudy Giuliani holds a nine-point lead over Hillary Clinton in the East Coast Blue State of New Jersey, a new Quinnipiac University poll finds. John McCain ties Hillary at 45%.

In other matchups:

* Giuliani tops Obama 50 - 39 percent; * Obama edges McCain 45 - 41 percent

A key number: New Jersey Independents favor Rudy over Hillary by a more than 20-point margin, 55%-34%.

Meanwhile, the poll shows that Hillary and Rudy both enjoy substantial leads in their respective Jersey primaries.

Senator Mary Landrieu's geogrpahic base in New Orleans was devastated by Hurricane Katrina, but that won't stop her from campaigning to evacuated constituents, Roll Call reports. In what a Landrieu aide called an "unprecedented" move, Landrieu's campaign will be running TV ads, sending direct mail, and other usual campaign tactics, but in other states. The campaign efforts will be aimed at New Orleans evacuees who are currently living in other states, but are registered to vote in Louisana and are eligible to vote absentee. While unprecendented for a Senate race, similar tactics were used by New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and his 2006 opponent, Landrieu's brother Mitch.

Here's some more straight talk from John McCain on his efforts to woo the right.

McCain -- who's been struggling to woo conservatives who haven't forgiven his run against George Bush and see him as an unreliable ally -- will be the only major GOP presidential candidate who will skip the preeminent gathering of conservatives of the year, The Washington Times reports.

But McCain asked for a chance to privately address attendees of the big event -- which has many speculating that he wants to appeal to them for their support but doesn't want to be seen publicly pandering to the same people. From the Times:

Sponsors of the Conservative Political Action Conference, which begins today in Washington and brings together thousands of conservative leaders and grass-roots activists, say the Arizona Republican has "dissed" organizers by attempting to schedule a private reception for attendees after rejecting invitations to speak at the event...

Conservative activists have speculated that Mr. McCain did not want to be seen on television "pandering" to Republican "right-wingers" but wanted to court those same activists at a reception in the same hotel.

Straight talk -- but only behind closed doors.

House GOP leaders will oppose Dem Rep. William Jefferson's appointment to the Homeland Security committee -- a move that will allow them to use Jefferson, who is being probed by the Feds, as a way to undermine the Dem leadership's promise to run a clean Congress, Roll Call reports.

"Rarely, if ever, do the parties attempt to intervene on each other’s committee assignments or internal party business," the paper says. "Yet Minority Whip Roy Blunt told reporters Wednesday following the weekly Republican Conference meeting that they would object to the unanimous consent request usually granted to approve mundane House business such as committee assignments. Republicans argue that because Jefferson is under federal investigation, he should not be given access to national security information." Dems could try to seat Jefferson as early as today, but may opt to wait until next week.

Meanwhile, our full TPMmuckraker file on Jefferson is here.

Can $4 billion buy off the Blue Dog Dems and get them to vote for Jack Murtha's controversial Iraq funding bill? We'll soon find out, according to The Hill:

House Democratic leaders will add nearly $4 billion for farmers to a bill funding military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to attract conservative Democrats concerned that the measure would wrongly constrict President Bush’s power as commander in chief...

Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and a senior member of the Blue Dog Coalition of some 45 conservative Democrats, said, “I don’t think the supplemental will pass if we don’t” add disaster-relief funds. Without farm-relief funds the Iraq-Afghanistan bill would lose “quite a few” Blue Dog votes, said Peterson. “They’d lose mine,” he added.

Murtha's bill -- which is being hashed out behind closed doors as House Dems seek language that they can build consensus around -- may be drawn up and circulated this week. Full story here.

Democrats view Hillary Clinton as the Dem candidate with the best chance of being President, a new Gallup poll finds. Asked if each candidate has an excellent chance, a good chance, or only a slim chance of being elected, nearly three out of four -- 74% -- said Hillary had an excellent or good chance. Seventy-one percent said Obama had an excellent or good chance, while 52% said that of John Edwards.

Key footnote: Sixty-nine percent of Independents said Hillary was electable, and a shade more -- 71% -- said that of Obama. Only 48% of them slotted Edwards into that category.

John McCain makes it official by announcing on David Letterman's show that he's running for President of the United States. From his exchange with Letterman:

“The last time we were on this program — I’m sure you remember everything very clearly that we say — but you asked me if I would come back on this show if I was going to announce,” Mr. McCain told David Letterman. “I am announcing that I will be a candidate for president of the United States.”

“Oh,” Mr. Letterman replied with what seemed at least a glimmer of surprise...

“By the way, I’ll be making a formal announcement in April,” Mr. McCain said. By way of explanation, he added: “This is the announcement preceding the formal announcement. You know you drag this out as long as you can. You don’t just have one rendition. You’ve got to do it over and over.”

Acting a bit downcast, Mr. Letterman responded, “How do you think that makes me feel?”

Watch the video here.

Another candidate may soon be joining the crowd of Democrats vying to take on GOP Senator John Sununu: Professor Jay Buckey of Darmouth Medical School, who is also a former astronaut. "Middle East security and our economic security are linked, and we have to break that link," Buckey told the Valley News. There's no question that Buckey has reached greater heights in life than any of the other Democrats: In 1998, he served on the space shuttle Columbia, spending 16 days in space and orbiting Earth 256 times.

Is former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore push-polling as part of his underdog campaign for the White House? Bob Novak reports that Gilmore's organization is using the tactic — which asks respondents loaded questions intended to create a negative impression about other candidates — in Iowa. The kicker? It's working:

Before the "push" element of Gilmore's poll, the unadulterated results showed McCain leading in Iowa with 33 percent, followed by Giuliani at 31.5 percent and Romney at 8.8 percent (the unknown Gilmore took just 1.3 percent). That the pollsters could cause so much movement by pushing — or "informing" — respondents that McCain opposed tax cuts, Romney took a pro-choice abortion stance in Massachusetts, and Giuliani supported Democratic Gov. Mario Cuomo's re-election in New York, for example, is very telling as to just how committed voters are to the "big three," even the ones who say they support them. Giuliani dropped by nine points with pushing, Romney lost five points (McCain actually rose 2 points).

Then the pushers went to work projecting Gilmore as a tax-cutting, job-creating governor of Virginia, head of a congressionally appointed commission on terrorism, chairman of the Republican National Committee and a National Rifle Association member. With that buildup, Gilmore finished first, well ahead of the field. That suggests that, under the current conditions, a campaign knocking down the conservative credentials of the "big three" could make a nominee out of even a long shot such as Gilmore — at least theoretically.

Novak's conclusion: "The lesson is that the prominent coverage of the 'big three' is by no means an indicator that they will remain out front. The conservative void on the Republican side is simply too great. Nature abhors a vacuum, as does the political world."

In an email sent out to supporters this afternoon, Hillary Clinton announced the sucessful completion of her "One Week, One Million"drive:

I want to thank you for the tremendous outpouring of support you showed me during our "One Week, One Million" drive. It was an incredible success, and it means so much knowing that I have so many friends all over the country who are committed to our campaign. As Bill said in his message yesterday, I know that with your help, we cannot lose.

John Edwards now has the support of a former Governor of a large state on the East Coast — a region fertile in financial contributions. PoliticsNJ reports that Edwards will be endorsed by former New Jersey Governor Dick Codey, who will chair the Edwards campaign in the state. Codey, as State Senate President, succeeded to the Governorship after the resignation of Jim McGreevey, and subsequently gained high approval ratings throughout his tenure, so his popularity could help bring in donations — and votes — for Edwards.

Here are few updates on the movements of the Presidential candidates:

* The issue of Bill Clinton's Presidenital pardons may be on the rise again for Sen. Hillary Clinton as her brother, Tony Rodham, is currently in court battling an order to repay $100,000 he received from a couple pardoned by President Clinton. As the Boston Globe notes, one of the criticisms David Geffen lobbed at Clinton last week was about the former President's choice of pardons, specifically that of Marc Rich, whose ex-wife had contributed to Hillary's Senate bid.

* Sen. Barack Obama has hired the director of Howard Dean's personal office, Matt Nugen, as his campaign's political director, Ben Smith reports.

* Meanwhile, Obama is turning his efforts to wooing House Democrats today with a meet-and-greet at the Democratic National Committee's headquarters. Obama's efforts will be supported by his "whips": Sen. Dick Durbin and Reps. Luis Gutierrez, Jerry Costello, Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson Jr., Danny Davis, Melissa Bean, Phil Hare, Jan Schakowsky, John Lewis, Neil Abercrombie, Adam Smith, Elijah Cummings, Artur Davis and Keith Ellison. You may notice that the whip crew includes the Dems' entire Illinois Congressional delegation except for Reps. Rahm Emanuel and Dan Lipinski.

* Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge has endorsed Sen. John McCain and will serve as the co-chairman of his Presidential exploratory committee. Ridge was the first ever Secretary of Homeland Security.

* Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's Iowa operation began taking shape yesterday when he announced the hiring of Tony Delgado as his Iowa political director. Delgado is a former Republican National Committee staffer with close ties to Giuliani's campaign manager, Mike DuHaime.

* Some conservatives are floating the idea that former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee should drop his bid for President and instead run against Dem Sen. Mark Pryor in 2008.

More after the jump.

Read more »

Another Mitt Romney flip flop -- this time on his attitude towards people of faith. First, check out this quote from a recent interview with Channel 13 of Iowa:

"I don't try to distinguish people based on their faith or lack of faith. Instead I look at what they're contributing and supporting this great land and our citizens."

But back on Feb. 16, Romney said:

"Let me offer just a thought, and that is, one of the great things about this great land is that we have people of different faiths and different persuasions. And I'm convinced that the nation does need to have people of different faiths, but we need to have a person of faith lead the country."

If Romney doesn't think it's a good idea to distinguish between people based on whether they have faith, then why should we do just that when picking a President?

Some new poll numbers suggest that the conventional wisdom — which holds that Hillary Clinton will suffer badly in the primary from her war vote and unwillingness to call it a mistake — may be questionable or even wrong.

The new numbers are buried in the big survey released this week by the Washington Post. Democrats were asked whether given "what was known at the time," it was the right thing for Hillary to vote for war authorization, or whether it was a mistake. A surprising 52% said her vote was the right thing to do at the time, versus only 47% who said it was a mistake.

What's more, when even those who said it was a mistake were then asked if Hillary should apologize, a mere 31% said yes. And guess how many said an apology wasn't necessary? Sixty-eight percent. And remember, these are potential Democratic primary voters.

From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders are backing away from a plan to scale back U.S. involvement in the Iraq war by using Congress' most powerful tool — withholding money in the budget.

Instead, party officials said Tuesday, leaders are weighing a proposal that would attempt to embarrass Bush into abandoning his war strategy. Under a plan discussed behind closed doors, Democrats probably would fund President Bush's entire $93.4 billion request for war spending this year but require that any troops sent into battle that don't meet certain standards receive a presidential waiver and that Congress be notified of the shortcoming.

The compromise is an attempt to please members who want to end the war immediately by cutting funding and others who do not want to appear as though Democrats are turning their back on troops.

One guesses that the idea here is also to force the President into being on record essentially saying that troops are going unprepared into battle. But still -- isn't this basically nothing more than adding a piece of paper to the process, or in other words, giving the President a power he has already, that is, to send more troops into battle? And does anybody really believe at this point that the President can be "embarrassed" into anything?

We're gonna check around and see what people think of this latest idea.

The Washington Post has released still more numbers from its poll this week. The poll's latest findings: Blacks are shifting towards Barack Obama and Evangelicals are shifting towards Rudy Giuliani.

In December and January, Post polls found that Hillary Clinton led Obama among blacks by 60%-20%. This week's poll says Obama now holds a slim advantage among African Americans, 44%-33%. Still, Clinton enjoys a healthy front-runner's lead in other areas: She's seen by Dems as the most electable, as the strongest leader, and as the candidate with the best experience to be President.

Meanwhile, on the Republican side, the Post says that Rudy Giuliani now holds a two-to-one margin over John McCain, largely because of "a shift among white evangelical Protestants, who now clearly favor Giuliani over McCain. Giuliani is doing well among this group of Americans despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives." The full poll is here.

The top-tier Presidential campaigns are quietly working to set the stage for a massive Feb. 5 primary day that could include at least 20 states, The Hill reports.

Top candidates like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani -- who are all working through surrogates to shift primaries forward -- want to move up the dates of big state contests they're likely to win so they can rack up early victories and momentum. A front-loaded primary schedule also helps the well-funded candidates because they have far more resources to compete in multiple states -- while hurting the lesser-funded candidates by making it tougher for them to build up momentum and money over time.

Full story here.

This is interesting: A new poll finds that Americans believe by an overwhelming margin that Bill Clinton would be an asset in the White House should his wife be elected President. The new survey by Gallup asked Americans if they thought Bill would be "mostly helpful" or "mostly hurtful" to a President Hillary. The answers? Respondents picked "mostly helpful" by a more than two-to-one margin, 70%-29%. Making this number even more interesting, respondents reached this conclusion even though 75% think Bill will have more or the same influence over Hillary than traditional Presidential spouses. And yet despite numbers like these, commentators continue to insist that Bill is a liability to Hillary's Presidential hopes. Go figure.

House Democrats huddled privately yesterday to hear details of Jack Murtha's as-yet-incomplete plan to slow the war by attaching troop-readiness benchmarks to war spending, and a couple of centrist members came away cautiously impressed, Roll Call reports.

“I’m impressed with what I heard,” Rep. Ellen Tauscher, chairwoman of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, told the paper. “I’m definitely open to Mr. Murtha’s proposal,” added Blue Dog Dem Rep. Mike Michaud.

At this point it's hard to gauge the long-term political viability of the Murtha plan. The Politico says today that the plan could be too damaged already to be viable. On the other hand, there was lots of talk about Dem disunity before House Dems came together to back the recent House resolution against escalation with near-unanimity. It's also worth noting that there isn't even a final proposal by Murtha for members to take a position on yet. The bill is expected to go to full committee next week and to hit the floor the week of March 12, so we'll see.

A leading figure of the antiwar movement is warning that Congressional Dems are at risk of badly botching the public relations battle over Iraq and is urging Congressional Dems to move more aggressively to confront the Republicans in the political showdown over ending the war.

The antiwar leader, Tom Andrews, the head of Win Without War, made the comments in an interview with Election Central. His comments reflected what he said is a growing anxiety among antiwar leaders that Congressional Dems are so consumed with uniting their caucus that they're neglecting to articulate a forceful enough antiwar message and thus risk fumbling the current PR war.

"Democrats have to fight," Andrews tells us. "Where are the voices in Congress reflecting the majority view of the American people?"

Andrew says that Dems are being far too timid in the face of a fierce GOP propaganda assault that has for days targeted Jack Murtha in an effort to define his plan for attaching conditions to war funds as micromanaging the war and defunding the troops. Win Without War, like Move On and some other antiwar groups, are generally supportive of the approach that as yet has been outlined by Murtha and other Congressional leaders.

Right now Dem leaders in the House and Senate are trying to gague sentiment in their respective houses of Congress and debating internally the specifics of how to confront the White House on the war. But Andrews says that such debate, while necessary, shouldn't prevent Dems from simultaneously mounting a tough PR counter-offensive -- something Andrews says Dems are failing to do.

"The Republicans should be on their heels," Andrews says. "They have put the troops in these conditions -- and they're the ones on the offensive!"

"There should be a relentless attack" from Dems, Andrews continues. "Dems in Congress should be talking relentlessly about the lack of equipment, the lack of training, the multiple deployments, every day. There should be a relentless demand for accountability."

"Even if you don't have a specific plan yet, you can at least stand up and counterattack against this Republican assault. That hasn't happened," Andrews concludes. "Every day there's not a relentless counterpunch is a missed opportunity. I think a lot more can be done and a lot more should be done."

Tough words for Congressional Dems from a top antiwar leader. Thoughts?

Okay, so it appears that the John Edwards campaign is unwilling to say whether his remarks at a press conference today were intended as criticism of Hillary Clinton.

As noted below, Edwards said at a press conference today that voters "want
you to tell the truth when you believe you have made a mistake." That sounded like a veiled reference to Clinton's war vote. But as many commenters below noted, Edwards didn't single out Clinton. So did Edwards intend this as an attack on Hillary? Yes or no?

We posed the question to the Edwards campaign. An Edwards aide emailed back the following:

“Senator Edwards’ remarks today are in reference to the feelings of many Americans who have lost faith in their President’s leadership. The American people deserve to have that trust restored -- and want a President they can trust and who will be trusted in the world.”

Given that The Politicker got a similar answer from an Edwards campaign spokesperson, I think we can assume that this is the campaign's official answer. That is, they're not saying it was an attack on Clinton -- but not saying it wasn't, either. The Edwards campaign doesn't seem to mind if the remarks are seen as criticism of her -- though it won't say so explicitly, of course.

So where are we, then? I'd say that the remarks shouldn't be interpreted as criticism of Clinton until the Edwards campaign names her directly.

That sound right?

A new Diageo/Hotline poll has a bunch of interesting stats:

• Given the open-ended question, "who would you most like to see elected president?" the top two choices were Democrats: Hillary Clinton was chosen by 18%, followed by Barack Obama, who was picked by 12%. Rudy Giuliani came in third, with 8%.

• A generic Democrat holds a wide lead over a generic Republican for President, 46%-28%.

• 50% of Democrats say the Iraq war — and to be more specific, opposition to it — is the most important issue facing the country today.

• Many voters think John McCain is significantly younger than he actually is. He's thought to be between 55 and 64 by 41% of respondents, the single most common answer — suggesting that perhaps his support could be affected greatly when people find out he's actually in his 70's.

• Hillary Clinton has the highest unfavorable rating, at 46%. Edwards' unfavorable number is 27%; Giuliani's is 25%; and Obama's is 19%.

Discuss.

In case you're interested in what the Dem leadership wants the message on Iraq to be today, we've got a copy of the internal talking points the leadership has sent out to House members and their advisers. Today's "message of the day," for instance, calls for House Dems to tout today's Washington Post poll and to stress that "Americans overwhelmingly trust Congressional Democrats over Bush" on Iraq.

Nothing terribly surprising, to be sure, but fun and interesting all the same. Anyway, if you're interested in seeing today's Dem "talkers," as the lingo has it, you can find them all after the jump.

Read more »

Ben Smith and Jason Horowitz both flag a John Edwards press conference today at which he took another shot at Hillary over Iraq:

"I think, actually, when you ask me about the most important personal characteristics of the next President of the United states are, I would say honesty, openness and decency," said Edwards. "You need to feel like you can trust the President of the United States. There is not a single voter in America who doesn't understand that their president is human, and their president will sometimes make mistakes. We've never had a president who didn't and we'll never have one in the future who doesn't.

"And I think what they want from us is that we continue to tell the truth. They want you to tell the truth when you believe you have made a mistake and they want you to change course when something is not working. We have six years ... of a president who has been completely unwilling to do that... So, no, I am proud that I have been honest about my vote and I have been clear about what I think we need to do in Iraq."

Smith dissects Edwards' remarks here; Horowitz's take here.

Update: We asked the Edwards campaign whether his remarks were intended as criticism of Hillary; the campaign's answer is here.

Here are a few updates on the movements of the Presidential candidates:

* Sen. Barack Obama is estimated to have raised between $350,000 and $500,000 at a standing room only fundraiser in Cincinnati, Ohio yesterday. And get this: Obama's appearance pulled in roughly 400 more attendees than former President Bill Clinton's last appearance in town during the 2006 midterm election.

* Rep. Duncan Hunter's campaign may have violated campaign finance laws when he used his political action committee to pay for TV ads in New Hampshire that benefitted his Presidential campaign. By law, PACs are only allowed to spend $5,000 on any Presidential candidacy, but Hunter's ad buys in New Hampshire alone totaled $17,575.

* Sen. Joe Biden, who will be in New Hampshire tonight to hold a town hall meeting on Iraq at Dartmouth College, has an op-ed in the Boston Globe today that argues Congress should repeal the 2002 authorization to use force in Iraq.

* In his first fundraising appearance since the mid-term elections, President Bush helped the GOP take in more than $10.4 million last night at an annual fundraiser for Republican governors. Bush is also set to raise money for the NRCC, RNC, and individual Republican candidates in both March and April.

* Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani addressed his Democratic past yesterday while speaking to the Hoover Institution in Washington, DC yesterday. Giuliani said that taxes were the key issues that led him down the road to the GOP.

* Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee named Rep. John Boozman as the co-chairman of his Presidential exploratory committee today. Boozman will work with Rep. Don Young to recruit other members of Congress and raise money on behalf of Huckabee.

More after the jump.

Read more »

Guess who's watching Al Gore's waist: Camp Hillary insiders! Camp Hillary is eyeing the former Vice President's fluctuating waistline as a sign of his intentions for 2008, Newsday reports. Apparently, Hillary aides think that if Gore sheds pounds it could be a sign he's moving towards running, whereas if he gains weight it could mean he's not.

"If he's running, he'll start losing weight fast," a Clinton insider told the paper. In a rejoinder that could be interpreted as less than flattering to the Vice President, the insider added: "Judging from where he is now, I'd say he's not running."

As Senate Democrats set about strengthening their majority, a potential concern would be a retirement by Joe Biden, who is currently running for President. While Biden is widely seen as being at the back of the Presidential pack, he would nevertheless be heavily favored for a seventh term if he runs for re-election next year — but a retirement could result in a win by Republican Congressman Mike Castle. However, Roll Call quotes Biden spokeswoman Elizabeth Alexander, who said that Biden has no plans to retire: "While Sen. Biden has presently suspended his campaign activities for the Senate due to legal requirements set by the Federal Election Commission, Sen. Biden intends to run for re-election in Delaware."

His hair's too perfect. He's not "tough" enough. He's too slick. He's flip-flopped too much. Those are the problems that the Mitt Romney campaign has identified about their candidate, according to a leaked campaign document obtained by The Boston Globe.

Among the key revelations: Romney plans to define himself in opposition to the liberal state he governed -- Massachusetts -- which is identified in the document as one of his key "bogeymen," along with France, socialism, and Hollywood:

The 77-slide PowerPoint presentation offers a revealing look at Romney's pursuit of the White House, outlining a plan for branding himself, framing his competitors, and allaying voter concerns about his record, his Mormon faith, and his shifts on key issues like abortion...

The plan, for instance, indicates that Romney will define himself in part by focusing on and highlighting enemies and adversaries, such common political targets as "jihadism," the "Washington establishment," and taxes, but also Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, "European-style socialism," and, specifically, France. Even Massachusetts, where Romney has lived for almost 40 years, is listed as one of those "bogeymen," alongside liberalism and Hollywood values.

Indeed, a page titled "Primal Code for Brand Romney" said that Romney should define himself as a foil to Bay State Democrats such as Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry and former governor Michael Dukakis. Romney should position himself as "the anti-Kerry," the presentation says. But elsewhere in the plan, it's clear that Romney and his aides are aware he's open to the same charge that helped derail Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004: that he is a flip-flopper who has changed positions out of political expediency.

Even better are the parts outlining the "vulnerabilities" of his opponents. On McCain:

[H]e's also seen as "too Washington," "too close to [Democratic] Left," an "uncertain, erratic, unreliable leader in uncertain times." "Does he fit The Big Chair?" the document asks. The plan calls McCain, 70, a "mature brand" and raises questions about whether he could handle the rigors of leading the free world.

On Giuliani:

[H]e is described as a one-dimensional Lone Ranger whose social views -- he supports abortion rights and civil unions for gay couples -- could destroy the "GOP brand." "We can't disqualify Dems like Hillary on social issues ever again" if Giuliani is the nominee, the document states.

The plan also touches on what it calls Giuliani's ethical issues, including his relationship with Bernard Kerik , former New York police commissioner who withdrew from consideration to become US homeland security secretary amid allegations of improprieties. It raises Giuliani's "personal political liabilities," an apparent reference to his three marriages and bitter public divorce from his second wife, Donna Hanover.

Our favorite bit of all:

It is clear that Romney's campaign operatives plan to make sure that voters are familiar with the perceived weaknesses of McCain and Giuliani and conduct opposition research on the candidates. But the campaign, according to the blueprint, also wants to avoid attacking either man too directly or harshly, in part because Romney wants their supporters to ultimately shift to him. At a campaign stop in New Hampshire last week, he called McCain and Giuliani friends and national heroes.

The Washington Post has released the full range of numbers from yesterday's poll this morning, and the numbers are startling:

* 53% of Americans favor setting a deadline for troop withdrawals

* 45% want the withdrawals to be completed within a year

* Nearly half -- 46% -- support restricting funding for the war

* 58% support the sorts of restrictions on the troops favored by Jack Murtha

And finally, the poll also found that a majority -- 51% -- strongly believe the war wasn't worth fighting. A total of 64% say it wasn't worth it, while only 34% say it was.

Memo to Dems: Have. No. Fear.

Steny Hoyer, the second most powerful Democrat in the House of Representatives, was abandoned by his father and was adrift as a young man before discovering politics, The Washington Post says in a long profile of Hoyer today.

The Post says that Hoyer's record as "consensus-builder" could make him key to maintaining unity among House Dems -- something that will become harder and harder as debate heats up over what specific proposals the House should employ to slow or stop the Iraq War.

Full story here.

The new Dem Congress may have made history by installing the first female House Speaker, and women and blacks are slowly gaining clout in D.C., but Congress still essentially remains an old boys' club dominated by white, wealthy, middle-aged men, according to CQ Politics.

The roster of women continued its slow but steady growth, although the record-high number of females in the new Congress — 87 altogether, with 16 percent of the membership in both chambers — still falls far short of reflecting the 51 percent female population of the United States.

The shares of African-Americans and Hispanics in Congress are essentially unchanged from last year: Eight percent of the members are black, as opposed to 13 percent of the national population, and 5 percent are Hispanic, even though Latinos now constitute 14 percent of the population — the largest non-white ethnic group in the country.

Full story here.

With the Senate set today to begin considering a bill to repeal the 2002 law giving President Bush the authority to go to war, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will move today to quell internal divisions that have arisen among Dems over Iraq, Roll Call reports:

Privately, Democratic aides argued that divisions have arisen, though not along substantive lines so much as over how best to proceed. Many Senate Democrats have supported much of Reid’s political strategy over the past two years because of his slow and often-methodical approach to messaging and political trench warfare, which has allowed ample time for the Caucus to hash out internal differences...

On Iraq, Reid and Pelosi have maintained loyalty and a unified voice over the past two years by keeping their focus on a general sense that Bush has failed in his prosecution of the Iraq War.

And while Democrats acknowledge that they must produce their own proposals now that they are in the majority, that process has moved too quickly and no consensus position has been fully developed.

Full story here.

Amid signs that Dems are no longer reaping a huge advantage over Republicans from soft-money 527 groups, Senate Dems are eyeing the possibility of limiting these groups as part of a broader package of campaign finance reforms, The Hill reports. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he's willing to explore new regulations governing 527s, which can now raise unlimited amounts of cash for federal elections.

Meanwhile, Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, is set to introduce legislation in the next few weeks to provide public funding for some Congressional candidates. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently said she backs public funding of Congressional races.

Full story here.

Rudy Giuliani appears to have a game plan when it comes to his breaks with social-conservative orthodoxy: play up his fiscal-conservative orthodoxy. The Associated Press reports that Rudy spoke to the Hoover Institution yesterday, and told them, "I don't think anything separates us more right now between Republicans and Democrats than how we look at taxes."

Rudy further elaborated, with conservative red meat like a comparison between Democrats and socialists: "What we understand as Republicans is that, sure, the government is an important player in this, but we are essentially a private economy. What Democrats really believe ... is that it is essentially a government economy."

Rudy explained that he had once been a Democrat, then became an independent, but was at first reticent about joining the Republicans, feeling their policies were not as good for the poor. But, Rudy added, "I finally came to the conclusion that we care about the poor more."

Like any Republican candidate, Rudy also invoked the name of Ronald Reagan. In this case he brought up how Reagan had once been a Democrat, in order to explain his own switch from Democrat to Independent to Repbulican, and he also made sure to drop the name of revered war-time leader Winston Churchill. "Ronald Reagan made only two changes. I was like Churchill, I made three."

Will Rudy's emphasis on taxes and security be appealing enough for conservatives that the GOP base would look past his history of social liberalism?

Update: It's important to point out that this poll's sample includes non-aligned voters who claim they will vote in a Dem or GOP primary in 2008, a technique which can skew the findings for both parties' primaries, since typically voters have to be registered Democrats or Republicans to vote in primaries. Many other polls take the measure of the candidates' support among people who already are registered Dems or Republicans.

Though Hillary Clinton leads the national Dem primary electorate with 33%, Barack Obama has made "dramatic gains" in recent weeks, moving from 14% to 25% backing, a new Zogby poll finds. The poll also found that on the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani has widened his lead over John McCain to nine points, 29%-20%.

Here are the poll's general election matchups:

* Giuliani 47%, Clinton 40% * McCain 47%, Clinton 39% * Clinton 45%, Romney 35% * Obama 46%, Giuliani 40% * Obama 44%, McCain 40% * Obama 51%, Romney 29% * Giuliani 46%, Edwards 40% * McCain 47%, Edwards 38% * Edwards 47%, Romney 32%

Zogby's conclusion is that these general election head to head numbers "show Obama strength."

“Really? I think that would roll a lot of people’s socks down.”

South Carolina pastor and local GOP official Max Kaster, as quoted by New York magazine, explaining what would happen should social conservatives hear that Rudy Giuliani moved in with a gay couple after his second separation.

A top supporter of Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign tells Election Central that former President Bill Clinton is hosting a series of private gatherings of elite donors designed to bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop for his wife's President campaign.

And here's the unusual thing about these big-ticket events: Hillary isn't at them. The main attraction is the former President -- Bill, Bill, and only Bill.

The unusual fundraising tactic reflects the bizarre circumstances that were sure to attend the candidacy of the spouse of a former President. Hillary has to be the first candidate with a spouse who's at least as potent a fundraising draw as the candidate herself -- an odd turn of events that leaves her free to campaign or raise money on her own while her spouse hosts private big-ticket events that don't require her presence as the main attraction.

According to the Hillary backer who spoke to Election Central, the former President is being offered up for private, low-key affairs attended by fewer people than the galas hosted by Hillary herself. Invitations to these gatherings aren't typically emailed out well in advance; they tend to be offered by phone on short notice when President Clinton's schedule permits, the source says.

It's well known that the former President has been sending out fundraising emails on his wife's behalf and is co-hosting a big splashy fundraising gala with his wife on March 18. But the smaller, private events for elite donors where Bill is the sole attraction seem to have passed under the radar.

According to our source, what typically happens is that Hillary's staffers call several of her top fundraisers and ask them if they can pull together a few hundred thousand dollars' worth of guests for an intimate gathering with President Clinton.

"Her gathering are meant to raise maximum dollars in front of maximum crowds," the Hillary backer tells us. "His are much smaller, but the threshold amount of money to attract him is around $300,000. He's a major fundraising vehicle for her. It's a way of attracting significant additional money at smaller events where people can have intimate conversations with the former President."

Clinton spokesman Jay Carson confirmed that the former President was conducting the events but was unable to say whether they were attracting such dollar amounts.

The top Hillary backer added: "They'll call her fundraisers and say, `If you can bring together contributions in the $300,000 vicinity, and we can find an opening in President Clinton's calendar, then we can put something together.' Or they'll say, `I've got the President on this or that date for an hour and a half -- can you raise $300,000 for it?'"

Right now the Clinton campaign is working hard to come in with a big dollar amount when the next filing comes due -- something the campaign will try to tout as another sign of her strength.

Camp Hillary's unusual fundraising technique is yet another sign that this Presidential campaign is perhaps the strangest and potentially most history-making in decades. "It's interesting," our source muses. "They have not one but two major stars that can act as the main attraction."

It isn't every day that a Lieutenant Governor, elected on a ticket with the Governor, breaks from his boss to endorse an opponent — but that's exactly what's happening in Kentucky, where Lt. Governor Steve Pence has endorsed former Congresswoman Anne Northup's challenge to Governor Ernie Fletcher in the Republican primary.

Fletcher was elected in 2003 as the first Republican Governor of Kentucky in over 30 years, but since then his tenure has been marred by a series of ethics scandals. The scandals have drawn severe criticism from a range of Kentucky pols — now including his own Lt. Governor. Pence recently told the Lexington Herald-Leader that for many the issue "is not whether the governor can be re-elected, but rather whether he should be re-elected."

"In 2003, what would our party's candidate for governor have said about a governor that had been indicted — taken the Fifth Amendment — and issued blanket pardons to his staff?" Pence added to the paper. "In 2003 what would our party's candidate for governor have said about an administration that endeavored to punish those who dared to disagree with them?"

Northup — who narrowly lost her swing House seat last November — has also been endorsed by U.S. Senator Jim Bunning, a sign that the GOP establishment are trying to throw Fletcher overboard and hold on to the Governor's Mansion. Few Kentucky Republicans think the badly damaged Fletcher can win against any of the top Democratic candidates for Governor. His own Lt. Governor is clearly among the skeptics.

Here are a few updates on the movements of the Presidential candidates:

* Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani will give a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, March 2 at noon. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will also address the conference. This will be a huge event, one that will get considerable press attention as a barometer of Rudy's ability to connect with social conservatives who disagree with him on all the hot-button issues.

* Sen. Barack Obama is scheduled to address the Midwest chapter of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in Chicago on Friday, Ben Smith reports.

* In an email bearing the name of former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign announced today that they have raised $619,896 after five full days of their "One Week, One Million" fundraising campaign. Four-hundred thousand to go!

* When asked what questions he gets asked the most on the campaign trail, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said he doesn't get asked about foreign policy much "in part because Republican audiences don't want to talk about it. It hasn't gone well. It feels like the team is losing and people don't want to hear about it."

* Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel told a crowd at the University of Nebraska yesterday that he was open to running on a hybrid ticket with a Democrat should he choose to run for President in 2008.

* Barack Obama is expected to raise at least $350,000 at a fundraising breakfast in Cincinnati, Ohio today. Obama spoke in Kentucky yesterday.

* Rudy Giuliani also announced today that Bill Simon will be joining his campaign as director of policy. Simon, the son of former US Treasury Secretary William E. Simon Sr, ran for Governor of Californian in 2001.

* Former Sen. John Edwards called the Clinton-Obama spat over David Geffen "silliness" while appearing on CBS' "Face The Nation" yesterday. According to Edwards, the only people asking him about it are reporters, not voters.

* In a bid to woo the Service Employees International Union, Sen. Hillary Clinton will spend a day working as a nurse. Former Sen. John Edwards, Sen. Chris Dodd and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson have all also accepted the SEIU's offer to spend a day in worker's shoes, though Clinton is the only to have chosen a specific job yet. Sen. Barack Obama is expected to participate as well.

* The Boston Globe notes that Sen. Clinton's campaign literature and website has been conspicuously absent of her maiden name -- Rodham -- though she is still using it on her Senate website.

* Clinton spoke to a majority African-American public employees union yesterday in Harlem about Black History Month.

* Former Dem Senate candidate Ned Lamont is endorsing Sen. Christopher Dodd's bid for President, which isn't terribly surprising considering that Dodd is his home-state Senator. Lamont sent an email to supporters asking for them to support Dodd's bill to restore Habeus Corpus.

* Speaking to a local TV station yesterday, Sen. Sam Brownback endorsed a "three-state, one-nation" solution for Iraq. He is set to campaign in South Carolina today.

* Rep. Dennis Kucinich recieved the Champion of Peace award yesterday from The Southern California Chapter of Military Families Speak Out, a group of military families who oppose the war in Iraq.

* Rep. Ron Paul spoke against the Iraq war and the abandonment of "commitments to smaller government" by the GOP while in New Hampshire yesterday.

* Pennsylvania Dem Gov. Ed Rendell and Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry both said on Fox News Sunday yesterday that they would not be interested in the Vice Presidency.

* Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson told a crowd at the University of Wisconsin-Stout that health care reform would be the primary issue of his campaign for President.

* Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is in New Orleans today to discuss ways to reshape the health care system.

Republican Senator John Warner, who recently co-sponsored a key Senate resolution against escalation, explains in a statement why he's backing the pro-escalation John McCain:

"America's next president will be challenged by a range of diplomatic and security issues of unprecedented complexity largely due to growing, worldwide terrorist threats," Warner said in the statement, released by McCain's presidential exploratory committee. "Senator McCain's long experience with, and understanding of, our military coupled with his proven, unquestioned courage and leadership, provide him with the essential qualifications for our next president."

No indication of what Warner thinks of the fact that McCain's "understanding" of military matters led McCain to precisely the opposite conclusion than he on the most important military policy question facing the country right now.

Bad news for President Bush: The highest-ranking Republican outside of Washington is now calling for a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. The Los Angeles Times reports that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said the following on CBS's Face The Nation:

"We're going to draw our troops out of Iraq. I think a timeline is absolutely important because I think that the people in America don't want to see another Korean War, another Vietnam War, where it's an open-ended thing."

Schwarzenegger added in the CBS interview that he was planning to communicate his thoughts directly to President Bush:

"If the opportunity is there, I definitely will," he said.

As it happens, Schwarzenegger is shifting towards a stronger pro-withdrawal position than he'd recently been displaying. Back in late November, here's what he told Meet the Press' Tim Russert:

MR. RUSSERT: What advice would you give the president about Iraq today?

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER: I would not give him any advice, because I would not, not—never be that presumptuous. I think that he has a lot of, you know, smart people around that study the subject...

Again, not the biggest deal, but it's at least somewhat telling about where the political winds are blowing.

In his latest column, Stuart Rothenberg lambastes Dems for painting the recent House vote against escalation as "bipartisan" -- then goes on to make the key point that Dems could actually benefit if opposition to the war is seen as partisan as they head into a showdown with the White House over Iraq:

But if the vote was overwhelmingly partisan, why don't Democrats just say so? What's the big deal?

The likely answer is that Democrats are trying so hard to avoid allowing Republicans to label their criticism as merely partisan that they won't even acknowledge the obvious...

In fact, a partisan division over the war probably would help Democrats by further damaging the Republicans between now and next year's Presidential election. After all, if it isn't merely President Bush, but also his entire party, that supports the war and ignores public opinion, Democrats would seem to benefit.

Obviously there are a handful of high profile Republicans who have opposed the Bush policy in Iraq for a considerable time - most notably Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska in the Senate and Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina in the House - and a number of GOP members of Congress have over the past couple of months sounded increasingly critical of Bush policies.

But the House vote demonstrates that Republicans still have not left the President's ship, even though it clearly seems to be sinking, and Democrats ought not be so wedded to their talking points' emphasis on bipartisan opposition to the war that they refer to a "bipartisan resolution" that clearly was nothing of the sort.

As noted below, a new poll released today found that Americans trust the Dem-controlled Congress over Bush on Iraq by an overwhelming margin of 20 points.

As the Dem-controlled Congress prepares this week to debate ways of winding down President Bush's war in Iraq, Dem Congressional leaders can take solace in an incontrovertible fact: When it comes to the war, Americans trust them over Bush by an overwhelming margin of 20 points. A new Washington Post poll released this morning finds that 54% of respondents trust Congress to get Iraq right, while only 34% trust Bush.

Though the current 20-point spread on Iraq is down from the 27 point gap that existed just before Bush's escalation speech, the new numbers -- combined with Bush's 31% approval rating on Iraq in today's poll -- would appear to suggest that Dems are in a commanding position as they prepare to debate ways to engineer a showdown over the war with the White House.

Meanwhile, the Post poll finds that Bush's general approval rating is mired at 36%. His disapproval number is 62%, with nearly one in two voters -- 49% -- "strongly" disapproving of Bush's performance.

John Warner may be among the most prominent anti-escalation Republicans in the Senate -- but that isn't stopping him from endorsing the GOP Presidential candidate who is escalation's most forceful advocate, Roll Call reports:

Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) will announce his support of McCain’s 2008 presidential bid today, lending the name of one of the chamber’s most respected old bulls to the Republican frontrunner’s developing Capitol Hill support.

In a brief interview, Warner, a former Armed Services chairman and one-time secretary of the Navy, cited his long personal history with McCain — as well as the importance of national security issues in the 2008 campaign — as the chief factors that led to his endorsement.

“To me, voters are going to seek out that candidate, be it Republican or Democrat, that’s got the proven credentials on issues that concern security abroad and here at home,” Warner said.

In his interview with Roll Call, Warner didn't address why it was that he was supporting McCain despite their differences over the single most important policy conundrum facing the country right now. (Of course, both of McCain's chief rivals, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have both voiced support for escalation in one form or another, too.)

Warner's endorsement brings the number of Senators backing McCain to eight, adding yet another big name to McCain's rapidly-multiplying GOP establishment backing. The Congressional support of McCain's chief rivals, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, is based almost entirely in the House of Representatives.

Rudy Giuliani is the only Presidential candidate of either party with relatively strong favorable numbers among Republicans, Democrats and Independents, a new Gallup Poll finds. The survey finds that Rudy's net favorable rating -- defined as "percentage favorable minus percentage unfavorable" -- is 70% among Republicans, 47% among Independents, and 18% among Democrats, a showing that demonstrates that Rudy has "uniquely broad-based political appeal," the poll concludes.

The Dem who comes closest to Rudy in cross-party appeal in the poll is Barack Obama, whose net favorable rating is 39% among Independents and 10% among Republicans. Interestingly, his net favorable rating among Dems is only 48%.

And Hillary Clinton? She's very strong among Dems, with a net favorable rating of 77%, but lags way behind Rudy (and to a lesser extent Obama) in broad-based appeal. Clinton is struggling with Independents and Republicans -- her net favorable rating with those two groups is 10% and -42% respectively.

Of course, Rudy's strong cross-party appeal may simply be a reflection of the fact that the national electorate doesn't know anything about Rudy except for the fact that lots and lots of TV commentators said he did a really great job leading the city after 9/11; he's generally refused to put himself in forums where he might encounter tough questions about his actual views on issues. Still, the numbers do reveal yet again the extent to which his 9/11 halo puts him in at least a starting position of surprising strength.

A group of influential religious conservative leaders held a secretive meeting last month on Amelia Island, Florida. In a measure of their unhappiness with the current GOP field, they tried to enlist South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford to make a run for the White House, according to The New York Times:

The event was a meeting of the Council for National Policy, a secretive club whose few hundred members include Dr. James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family, the Rev. Jerry Falwell of Liberty University and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform. Although little known outside the conservative movement, the council has become a pivotal stop for Republican presidential primary hopefuls, including George W. Bush on the eve of his 1999 primary campaign...

[I]n a measure of their dissatisfaction, a delegation of prominent conservatives at Amelia Island tried to enlist as a candidate Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, a guest speaker at the event. A charismatic politician with a clear conservative record, Mr. Sanford is almost unknown outside his home state and has done nothing to prepare for a presidential run. He firmly declined the group’s entreaties, people involved in the recruiting effort said. A spokesman for Mr. Sanford said he would not comment.

The three most conservative GOP Presidential candidates -- Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter and Sam Brownback -- all gave speeches at the meeting, the paper reports.

But in subsequent interviews conservatives expressed dissatisfaction with this trio, too, for all manner of reason. They said they were unhappy with Huckabee because of his alleged tax-and-spend policies as Arkansas Governor; displeased with Hunter for his advocacy of protectionist trade policies; and dissatisfied with Brownback for "touching only briefly on the threat of Islamic terrorists" during his remarks. Not an easy crowd to please.