A sizeable majority thinks the Attorney Purge was politically motivated -- and more people think Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign than think he should stay, a new poll finds.

The new survey by Newsweek finds that a solid 58% think the firing of U.S. Attorneys was "politically motivated," while only 15% think it wasn't. Meanwhile, 35% think Gonzales should resign, and 32% think he shouldn't.

Tick, tock, tick, tock...

An interesting article on Barack Obama's childhood in today's New York Times reports that "the seeds of his racial consciousness, its attendant alienation and political curiosity appear to have been planted in Hawaii."

"Mr. Obama’s family here in Hawaii saw a more complex young man, a person whose racial confusion and feelings of alienation were matched with equal parts ambition, disquietude and lofty notions about where his internal struggles might lead," the paper says.

Partly as a result, his sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, says: “There was always a joke between my mom and Barack that he would be the first black president."

This is pretty hilarious. The Rudy campaign is so determined to prove his conservative credentials that it's now circulating a quote from a black newspaper describing him as an "evil" conservative -- and they're presenting this as a plus.

Rudy is currently under heavy assault by a New York conservative named George Marlin, a longtime Rudy nemesis who's launched a Web site called "Rudy's Really Liberal". Marlin is trying to educate conservatives across the country about Rudy's true liberal nature.

Now the Rudy camp has hit back. Via The Politicker, the Albany Times Union's political blog reports that one of the things Rudy's campaign is doing to rebut this attack is the following:

The campaign also helpfully provided a bunch of quotes from New York papers that demonstrate Giuliani’s conservative credentials, such as this one from The Amsterdam News in 2000 (before Giulani dropped out of the U.S. Senate race):

“[Giuliani’s] Only Hope For An Overwhelming Victory In Upstate New York Would Be To Remain As He Is: A Hard-Nosed, Evil, Racist Republican Conservative.”

Well, if someone is calling you a "hard-nosed, evil, racist Republican conservative," you must be doing something right. Or so Rudy advisers appear to believe, anyway.

John McCain has apparently studied George Allen's downfall and taken its central lesson to heart: He just apologized for using the racially-loaded phrase "tar baby" — the same day he was caught using it on tape.

McCain was captured on video by CNN employing the phrase at a town hall meeting in Cedar Falls. McCain had been asked if he would work on issues of fathers' access to their children, and he responded by saying that he was skeptical of efforts to tinker with divorce law and court decisions, calling such a move a "tar baby of enormous proportions."

The phrase, a term for a sticky situation that originated in the Br'er Rabbit stories, has also come to be known as a racial slur for black people. McCain clearly meant the phrase to be understood in its original sense. Nonetheless, when he was confronted by CNN's Candy Crowley about the more loaded meaning of the word, McCain — unlike Allen, who let his Macaca comment fester for days and days — immediately apologized. "I hope that it's not viewed that way," McCain said. He then explained the context of the situation and added, "I don't think I should have used that word and it was wrong to do so."

Another flip-flop from Mitt Romney? Yep — this time on illegal immigration.

The Boston Globe reports that Romney invaded John McCain's home state of Arizona this week, where he held a press conference with Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who's a hero for anti-immigration types because he likes rounding up illegal immigrants. According to The Globe, Romney said:

"My view is there should be no advantage for those that are here illegally in pursuing a course of permanent residency." He added that he also opposes a guest-workers program on the grounds that it would "substantially increase the number of individuals who would come through on a temporary worker basis and open a path for citizenship for them, as well."

The red-meat anti-immigration remarks were very similar to what Romney said a few weeks ago at CPAC, where he bashed the "McCain-Kennedy" immigration policy and proclaimed to great applause, "amnesty didn't work 20 years ago, and it won't work today."

But were these always Romney's views of the issue? Nope. More after the jump.

Read more »

Just heard back from New York Times spokesperson Catherine Mathis. The paper is declining to comment on former President Bill Clinton's claim at a private fundraiser that the paper is obsessed with Hillary's refusal to call her war vote a "mistake" while giving Barack Obama a pass.

CNN and the Los Angeles Times have just announced that they will be teaming up to co-host back-to-back debates in January 2008 -- just days before the new "super-primary" day of Feb. 5. That would be less than a year from now.

The two news orgs have traditionally paired up to host debates just before the California primary in June. But California's state legislature recently moved up the state's contest to February, prompting the decision by CNN and the LA Times to move up the date of their debate, too. The earlier date will ratchet up the debate's importance, because it will have the capacity to influence the outcome far earlier in the process.

The Republican debate will be held on Jan. 30 while the Democrats will meet on Jan. 31.

Barack Obama's campaign is responding to remarks that President Clinton made at a private fundraiser in which he slammed The New York Times for being overly aggressive toward Hillary while going soft on Obama.

As I just reported over at The Horse's Mouth, a source who was present at the fundraiser says that Clinton pointed to some remarks by Obama that, he claimed, weren't being covered prominently by the paper. Specifically, Clinton claimed that a few years ago Obama was quoted in another paper saying that he didn't know if he would have voted for the war -- a quote, Clinton said, that is receiving far less attention from The Times than Hillary's refusal to say that her vote was a "mistake."

Now Obama has hit back, issuing the following statement in response to Clinton:

“In 2002, I opposed giving President Bush the authority to invade Iraq, and said that a war based not on principle but on politics would lead to a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I wish those words had never come true, but I have stood by them since that day and continue to today.”

More in a bit.

Update: A commenter notes that Obama didn't really hit back here -- he merely responded to President Clinton's remarks. True enough.

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

* Former Sen. John Edwards proposed yesterday that the United States spend $5 billion annually to combat global poverty, which he linked to national security saying that "terrorists thrive in failed states and in states torn apart by internal conflict and poverty." He also said he would create a new cabinet post "to oversee all of our efforts to fight global poverty."

* Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has hired former Sen. Rick Santorum's campaign manager, Vince Galko, as his regional political director for Northeastern states. Galko is a former executive director of the Pennsylvania Republican Party and served as deputy executive director of the Bush/Cheney campaign in 2004.

* Sen. Barack Obama attended a $2,300-a-ticket fundraiser for his presidential campaign in Chevy Chase, Maryland last night that was populated by a bevy of ex-Clinton administration officials, including former FCC commissioners William Kennard and Reed Hundt, Hundt and Kennard's counsel Julius Genachowski, and State Department officials Miriam Sapiro, Susan Rice and Bonnie Cohen.

* New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson acknowledged that his imminent signing of a bill legalizing medical marijuana in New Mexico could be a risky move for to his nascent presidential campaign, but was not deterred by the political consideration, saying "So what if it's risky? It's the right thing to do."

* Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) have filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission "asking it look into how Congressman Duncan Hunter might be illegally using his political action committee to aid his presidential campaign." Hunter used PAC money in January, after he was an announced candidate, to purchase ads promoting himself in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

* Speaking on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich declared that "impeachment may well be the only remedy which remains to stop a war of aggression against Iran."

Read more »

GOP Senator Gordon Smith should theoretically be vulnerable in 2008 thanks to his initial support of the war and the fact that his seat is in a Dem-leaning state — but national Democrats are struggling to come up with a good candidate to take Smith out, Roll Call reports.

At first glance, Smith wouldn't appear to be in danger. Smith is known as a genial campaigner who has historically run ahead of the rest of the Republican ticket. He was first elected to his seat in 1996 despite Bill Clinton's victory, and his reelection in 2002 coincided with a Democratic victory in the open-seat Governor's race. And he's got $2 million in the bank — a healthy stockpile for such a low-profile state.

National Democrats, however, think Smith is more vulnerable this time around thanks to the national climate created by the war. As one Dem operative put it to Roll Call: "Iraq is his biggest vulnerability." Smith, for his part, has put as much distance as possible between himself and the rest of his party on Iraq: Yesterday he was the only Republican to vote for the failed Democratic resolution calling for phased withdrawal from Iraq in 2008.

Nevertheless, the right Dem is proving elusive. Potential top candidates who have taken themselves out of the running include Congressman Pete Defazio, former Governor John Kitzhaber and others.

National Dem strategists are aggressively searching for someone to run for C.W. Bill Young's Florida House seat, which is shaping up as one of the DCCC's top targets for a Dem takeover, today's St. Petersburg Times reports.

A DCCC recruiter recently met with potential candidates, including former state House Speaker Peter Wallace, former state Rep. Lars Hafner, and businessman and neighborhood activist Karl Nurse. Young is 76 and would be running for a 19th term -- and whether or not he retires, DCCC strategists think the seat's in play.

"Regardless of whether he retires, we think this is a highly competitive seat. It's definitely one of our top targets," The DCCC's Kyra Jennings tells the paper. "After 37 years in Washington people get out of touch with their district and don't represent it the way the people deserve." Full story here.

Two for two: A new Zogby poll finds that nearly half of respondents say they would never vote for Hillary Clinton — the second poll in two days reaching that conclusion.

In today's Zogby survey, 46% of likely voters say they would never vote for Hillary Clinton — exactly the same number who said the same thing in a Rasmussen poll that was released yesterday.

The only Presidential candidate who does worse in this department according to today's Zogby poll is Newt Gingrich (who was not tested in the Rasmussen poll), with 53% of voters dead set against him. Al Gore is slightly less unpopular than Hillary, with 43% saying they would never vote for him, followed by Mitt Romney at 39%. Candidates like Barack Obama, John Edwards and John McCain had more respectable scores in the low 30's, with Giuliani at the lowest score of 29% — rankings that mirror yesterday's findings, too.

Is the engine of the "Straight Talk Express" already sputtering? Despite the aggressively publicized relaunch of this symbol of his alleged 2000 maverick streak -- which we reported here yesterday -- John McCain is refusing to answer tough questions about the Attorney Purge and homosexuality. Here's what today's New York Times says about the McCain bus tour's opening yesterday:

"On Thursday, even as he promised a stream of the candid comments that distinguished him in 2000 -- `Anything, anything you want to talk about,' he said -- he steered clear of offering opinions on two of the biggest issues on the political landscape this week. He declined to say whether he agreed with the assertion by Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that homosexuality is immoral, or whether he thought Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales should be ousted for his handling of the firing of federal prosecutors."

Say one thing for Camp Hillary: It's very good at playing the expectations game. Experts expect that Hillary will raise an impressive $30 million this quarter with the help of her husband, who happens to be perhaps the most powerful fundraising draw in the Democratic Party, the Associated Press reports.

"Publicly, the Clinton campaign has declared a goal of $15 million, an amount campaign experts expect her to easily double when candidates report their totals for the first quarter ending March 31," the AP says.

The AP also reports something that you first learned here on this blog: "The former president has been the featured guest at a series of exclusive lunches and dinners, where attendees are asked to pony up $4,600 -- the maximum allowable contribution -- to his wife's campaign. "

Paging Andrea Mitchell: A new Gallup poll finds that Americans oppose a pardon for "Scooter" Libby by more than three to one. Sixty-seven percent of respondents oppose a Presidential pardon for Vice President Dick Cheney's aide, while only 21% support one.

Intriguingly, however, support for Libby rises among those who say they're following the case more closely. Forty-four percent of those who claim to be following it "very closely" favor a pardon, while only 25% of those who are following it "somewhat closely" favor one. Meanwhile, the poll shows that President Bush and Cheney are neck and neck in the race for the unpopularity title. Bush checks in with an approval rating of 35%, while Cheney's is stuck at 34% -- the lowest the Gallup poll has registered for the Veep yet.

From the Los Angeles Times:

California today joined the national scramble to choose presidential nominees far earlier, as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation to advance the state's presidential primary election to Feb. 5...

"Nothing will be over until California votes, so if you go on Feb. 5 you're guaranteed a voice," said Rhodes Cook, an elections expert and Washington publisher of a nonpartisan guide to politics. "You're not guaranteed that on Feb. 6 or later."

High-fives audible from Rudy headquarters.

Update: Atrios points out a key flaw in the argument that this automatically benefits "moderate" Republicans like Rudy.

The Senate is controlled by the Democrats, but it couldn't get a vote calling for phased withdrawal passed — even as it did pass by an overwhelming margin a measure renouncing the option of defunding the war.

The vote that would have called for phased withdrawal failed about an hour ago by a 48 to 50 vote, failing to even garner a majority. Sixty votes were needed for passage under Senate rules, but 47 Republicans, plus Joe Lieberman and Dem Senators Mark Pryor and Ben Nelson, voted against it. One Republican, Oregon's Gordon Smith, voted with the majority of Democrats for the Reid resolution.

Meanwhile, the Gregg resolution — which repudiates the option of cutting off funds — just passed by an overwhelming margin, 82-16.

The moral of the story: Don't look to the Senate for radical change. That's precisely the opposite of what it's designed to do.

Update: Meanwhile, the $124 billion supplemental spending bill designed to slow and eventually stop the Iraq war passed the House Appropriations Committee today. The only Dem who voted no was Rep. Barbara Lee, who's called for the funds to be used to fund withdrawal.

Hillary clarifies things, saying in a statement that, no, homosexuality is not immoral:

"I have heard from many of my friends in the gay community that my response yesterday to a question about homosexuality being immoral sounded evasive. My intention was to focus the conversation on the failed don't ask don't tell policy. I should have echoed my colleague Senator John Warner's statement forcefully stating that homosexuality is not immoral because that is what I believe."

...but why hide behind John Warner?

Update: Okay, in fairness, Hillary was very direct and forceful in an interview with Bloomberg News:

"Well I've heard from a number of my friends and I've certainly clarified with them any misunderstanding that anyone had, because I disagree with General Pace completely. I do not think homosexuality is immoral...let's not be eliminating people because of who they are or who they love."

A new Rasmussen poll finds that nearly half of voters — 46% — say they would definitely vote against Hillary, while only 26% say they'd definitely vote against Rudy, the lowest number of any of the Presidential candidates. The two candidates were an even draw when it comes to the number of people who say they would definitely vote for the two: 30% would definitely pick Hillary, while 31% say they'd definitely pick Rudy. Rudy, meanwhile, is the only candidate in this poll to have more people say they'd definitely vote for him than would definitely vote against him.

Here's how some of the other candidates fared with the definitely for vs. definitely against question:

• Barack Obama, 28%-37% • John McCain, 21%-34% • John Edwards, 20%-39%

General Peter Pace's recent observation that homosexuality is "immoral" finally has the support of one of the Presidential candidates: GOP Senator and religious right darling Sam Brownback. Brownback is circulating a letter among his fellow Senators saying that he backs Pace and excoriates criticism of him as "unfair and unfortunate." Brownback even writes, "In fact, we applaud General Pace for maintaining a personal commitment to moral principles." To read the full letter, click here.

Read more »

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

* While Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have both called for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign in the wake of the unfolding U.S. Attorneys scandal, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Chris Dodd are against forcing him out. Richardson, speaking at the International Association of Fire Fighters presidential forum yesterday, said it's "the President's choice" and that he'd "rather the president have a chat with Gonzales and tell him to clean it up."

* While appearing on MSNBC's "Tucker" yesterday, Rep. Duncan Hunter was asked if he would call former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani a conservative. His response? "No, I wouldn't." In other Hunter news, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics and Washington (CREW) has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission about whether Hunter illegally used money from his political action committee to aid his presidential campaign.

* According to Democratic consultant Bob Shrum's upcoming memoir, "No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner," Sen. Hillary Clinton's camp lobbied hard in 2004 to get her on John Kerry's shortlist of Vice Presidential candidates, but she was ultimately taken off because polling indicated that she "had high negatives - she would hurt the ticket."

* Appearing on the "Today Show" this morning, Sen. Barack Obama vowed that he would not make his rivals personal lives an issue as he campaigns against them for President. Obama's own personal history was pulled a bit more into the spotlight today when the Los Angeles Times published an article detaling his adolescent days in Indonesia, where he "was registered by his family as a Muslim at both of the schools he attended" because his step-father was Muslim.

* Sen. John McCain will be traveling through Iowa for the next two days on the "Straight Talk Express" bus he used during his 2000 presidential campaign, though some say the moniker may not be as effective for him this time around as he is increasingly seen as an establishment candidate. Minneasot Gov. Tim Pawlenty is joining him for the trip.

* California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation this morning moving California's primary from June to Feb. 5, which is now being referred to as "Super-Duper Tuesday." The move is expected to have a significant impact on the dynamics of the 2008 presidential campaign.

Read more »

Wow -- talk about trying to "rekindle" the magic of the Straight Talk Express, as The Washington Post put it today.

It turns out McCain is quite literally trying to do this: He's relaunching the Straight Talk Express itself! The McCain campaign just sent out an email to supporters announcing the great news:

In my last campaign for President, I traveled thousands of miles across America in my campaign bus, dubbed the Straight Talk Express. The Straight Talk Express came to symbolize a new type of politics in America, an unfiltered discussion on any topic of the day in an environment where politicians leave the spin at the door. The Straight Talk Express took me to hundreds of town hall meetings and campaign events where Americans and I had real conversations.

Today, as this campaign for President continues, I am again boarding the Straight Talk Express for a bus tour through Iowa and New Hampshire and a series of town halls. For our friends in Iowa and New Hampshire, I hope I will be seeing you over the next few days on the road, but I know that not everyone will have the opportunity to be a part of these events.

The McCain campaign Web site even has a special page devoted to the imminent bus tour:

The Straight Talk Express' first stops are today in Ames and Mason City, Iowa. Hop aboard!

Is the DSCC having doubts about Al Franken's campaign for the Senate? Minnesota Monitor reports that the DSCC has reached out to freshman Congressman Tim Walz — whom Franken extensively campaigned for last year — and asked him to get into the Minnesota Senate Democratic Primary. Walz is saying no, according to his spokesperson: "Tim Walz is not and will not be a candidate for the United State Senate in 2008. He will be meeting with the DSCC in the near future to discuss how he can best help raise the profile of Minnesota's Senate race and he plans to do what he can to ensure the DFL Senate candidate wins Minnesota's 1st Congressional District in 2008."

Although recent polling shows Franken's gap with Coleman narrowing, the polls nevertheless give Franken a net unfavorable.

Analyst Stuart Rothenberg, who recently stated flatly that Rudy can't win the GOP nomination, now says he isn't so sure Rudy won't win, after all:

I’ve asked a number of thoughtful political consultants, from both parties, who they think is most likely to be the GOP nominee and who is the least likely. So far, Giuliani is seen as the most likely and McCain as the least. That’s not a scientific sample or a reliable poll. But that kind of anecdotal evidence has me more confused than ever.

Of Mitt Romney, Rothenberg writes:

He is smart, articulate, telegenic and oozes leadership. But he’s changed his stands on hot-button issues over the years, and his Mormon religion will be a problem among some key Republican constituencies. Plus, his foreign policy and national security credentials are thin, at best.

If Rothenberg is wondering why Rudy is surprisingly strong, he's partly answered his own question here. Note that he observes that Romney's foreign policy credentials are thin, but doesn't make the same observation of Rudy, whose credentials in that area are every bit as thin as Romney's.

Bottom line: If insiders, reporters and commentators cede Rudy the aura of foreign policy strength based on the sole fact that he was politically fortunate enough to be Mayor of New York on Sept. 11, rather than seriously digging into his lack of a real record on foreign policy, he'll have a far better shot at the nomination, not to mention the White House. This obviously isn't the only factor at play, but it certainly is a key one. No mystery here.

Analyst Stuart Rothenberg, who recently stated flatly that Rudy can't win the GOP nomination, now says he isn't so sure Rudy won't win, after all:

I’ve asked a number of thoughtful political consultants, from both parties, who they think is most likely to be the GOP nominee and who is the least likely. So far, Giuliani is seen as the most likely and McCain as the least. That’s not a scientific sample or a reliable poll. But that kind of anecdotal evidence has me more confused than ever.

Of Mitt Romney, Rothenberg writes:

He is smart, articulate, telegenic and oozes leadership. But he’s changed his stands on hot-button issues over the years, and his Mormon religion will be a problem among some key Republican constituencies. Plus, his foreign policy and national security credentials are thin, at best.

If Rothenberg is wondering why Rudy is surprisingly strong, he's partly answered his own question here. Note that he observes that Romney's foreign policy credentials are thin, but doesn't make the same observation of Rudy, who's credentials in that area are every bit as thin as Romney's.

Bottom line: If insiders, reporters and commentators cede Rudy the aura of foreign policy strength based on the sole fact that he was politically fortunate enough to be Mayor of New York on Sept. 11, rather than seriously digging into his lack of a real record on foreign policy, he'll have a far better shot at the nomination. No mystery there.

This is interesting: Gallup took a look at three of its recent polls and concluded that highly religious Republicans are "significantly less likely" to support Rudy than nonreligious Republicans are. Gallup's analysis found that when they were asked who they preferred for the GOP nomination, only 31% of the religious Republicans -- defined as "those who attend church weekly" -- chose Rudy, Meanwhile, 47% of those who attend church less picked Rudy, as did 49% of those who seldom or never attend church. More data here.

Demn caucus chair Rahm Emanuel has advised new Dem members of Congress to avoid appearing on Stephen Colbert's show lest they get singed by Colbert's brand of satire, The Hill reports.

Emanuel, who last year helped engineer the Democratic Party's capture of the House, is exercising his influence to try to keep freshman Dems in office. "The freshmen respect Emanuel, but they don’t always follow his orders," says The Hill. "On the other hand, avoiding the kind of publicity that only `The Colbert Report' can confer on a lawmaker may be the only advice from Emanuel that freshman Democrats are ignoring."

John McCain is struggling to rack up the backing of huge swaths of the GOP establishment while simultaneously maintaining his image as a "maverick" and "independent" candidate who speaks directly to voters, today's Washington Post reports.

"Appearing the insurgent will be no small task for McCain, given that he has aggressively courted the GOP establishment this time," the paper says.

"The GOP presidential landscape is also very different. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has crafted a no-nonsense, take-charge image that has him leading in most national polls. And both Giuliani and Romney are campaigning as outsiders free of ties to Washington."

Hillary would keep a “remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, saying that if elected President she'd keep a reduced military force there for a variety of missions, today's New York Times reports.

In an interview with the paper, Hillary said she'd keep the reduced military force there to prevent Iraq from turning into a failed state "that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda. It is right in the heart of the oil region. It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel’s interests.”

"Mrs. Clinton’s plans carry some political risk," the paper claims. "Although she has been extremely critical of the Bush administration’s handling of the war, some liberal Democrats are deeply suspicious of her intentions on Iraq, given that she voted in 2002 to authorize the use of force there and, unlike some of her rivals for the Democratic nomination, has not apologized for having done so."

House Dems confidently predict they can pass their legislation to end the Iraq war -- though the chances of it eventually becoming law are slim, the Associated Press reports.

The House Appropriations Committee will vote on the $124 billion spending bill for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars today, setting the stage for a floor vote next week. "But prospects of the bill becoming law are dim," the AP says. "In addition to a White House veto threat and overwhelming GOP opposition to the bill, the legislation is unlikely to survive in the Senate, where Democrats have been reluctant to adopt a firm timetable to end the war."

MoveOn is privately demanding that House Dem leaders make key changes to their legislation on Iraq -- a move that could seriously complicate the leadership's efforts to build consensus behind an approach to ending the Iraq war, Election Central has confirmed.

MoveOn's Washington director, Tom Matzzie, confirmed in an interview that the group told people in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office this afternoon that they were unhappy with two major components of the bill. He said that the bill lacks tough enough enforcement language -- meaning that the bill doesn't contain strong enough provisions to compel withdrawal after the deadlines set forth in the legislation.

Such language was removed from earlier drafts, frustrating some liberal House Dems, and the current version merely declares the war illegal after the deadlines, rather than stopping funding, which could mean Congress would have to take the White House to court to stop the war.

"We've communicated to the Speaker's office that we want tougher enforceability in the bill," Matzzie tells me. "We want something that's got teeth."

Asked if the current bill doesn't have teeth, he said: "We want sharper teeth." Asked specifically what might be used to toughen enforcement, Matzzie said that he wasn't necessarily opposed to a legal solution, as opposed to a cut in funding, but didn't offer further specifics, saying that the details should be left to legislative staff. "We want this bill to be tougher," he said.

More after the jump.

Read more »

The low comedy just never stops with Michele Bachman: It's now emerged that the Congresswoman's press secretary is allegedly encouraging constituents to send letters to local newspapers in support of the Congresswoman.

A screenshot of the letter has now turned up on the Dump Michele Bachman blog. It's an amusing read. From the letter:

As you may have seen, Michele has been the focus of lots of media lately and most of it not friendly. We want to make sure that the media and others reading the paper get a balanced view of Michele Bachmann. Therefore, if you could take just a moment of your time to write 50-100 words about why your support Michele that would be fantastic and I know how much she would appreciate seeing that in the paper. Below are a couple of suggestions and links to different editors. If you have any questions for me, either on information or looking for a paper's contact info please let me know.

Suggestions:

1) Talk about Michele as a mother (5 biological, 23 foster kids) and wife. Her devotion to her family and making Minnesota a better place.

2) Her strong fiscal conservative roots. She is a sponsor of the Line-item veto and the balanced budget amendment.

3) Her first piece of legislation is the Health Care Freedom of Choice Bill that would make all medical expenses and insurance premiums tax deductible for individuals - why haven't the press reported on that.

4) Her continued commitment to the men and women of our military and not playing politics with the war on terrorism.

5) Any other topic that will share the real Michele Bachmann with other Minnesotans who don't know her personally.

Repeated calls to reach Fredrickson and confirm whether or not she wrote the letter have not been returned.

As we promised you earlier today, CNN has now released its new poll of the Presidential race, and it does indeed find that Hillary Clinton is besting Barack Obama nationally by 15 points, 37%-22%. As it happens, both candidate rose in the polls by similar amounts from a CNN poll in January. Hillary went up three points, and Obama rose four. John Edwards, meanwhile, dropped three points, from 15% to 12%. Full poll here.

We just heard back from John McCain's campaign spokesman, Danny Diaz, and he's declining to comment on the Attorney Purge. That means we've now hit the trifecta: All three leading GOP Presidential hopefuls have now declined to comment on the the biggest political scandal of the moment and the White House's role in it.

As noted yesterday, we think Rudy Giuliani in particular should be heard from on this. He was after all a U.S. Attorney himself from 1983-1989 -- a fact that he's featuring prominently in his campaign bio's efforts to present him as a crime fighter. So he would seem to be particularly well positioned to offer an informed opinion on the topic at hand. We put out request to his campaign, as well as to those of Romney and McCain.

But yesterday, Camp Rudy told us that he wouldn't be issuing a statement. So did Mitt Romney's campaign. So with McCain, that now makes all three.

How much longer can these guys go without commenting on this?

Here are a few quick updates on the movements and staffing decisions of the Presidential candidates:

* CNN and the Congressional Black Caucus Institute are teaming up to host a Democratic candidates debate in South Carolina in January 2008. It is unclear whether this means the CBC will not team up with Fox News to host a debate, which had been rumored to be in the works. As Ben Smith reports, at least one group of African-American online activists, Color of Change, has been working to stop the Fox News/CBC collaboration from happening.

* Since 2005, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, has been a paid lobbyist for Citgo Petroleum Corp., a unit of the state-owned oil company controlled by Venezuelan President Hugo
Chavez. Giuliani himself has not personally lobbied for Chavez's interests, but the firm bearing his name and reputation has.

* Edwards named much of his Iowa caucus and campaign staff today, led by state director Jennifer O’Malley, who was Edwards’ Iowa field director during the 2004 caucuses. Other staffers include field director Jackie Lee, political director Pat Maloney, trip director Matt McGrath, deputy press secretary Mark McCullough, deputy field director Zach Wineburg, surrogate trip director Chris Fields, operations director Melanie Muenzer, regional field directors Andy Zabel, Chad Horrell, Elizabeth Lucas, Pam Danielson and Jessica Jones.

* During a press conference in Arizona, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney expressed support for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and said that Gen. Peter Pace "was wise to correct his comment and to suggest that that was an inappropriate point to have made," though he hedged on whether he agreed with Pace's sentiment that homosexuality is "immoral." Romney attended a fundraiser after the presser that netted his campaign $300,000.

* Sen. Joe Biden called President Bush's Iraq policy "god awful" on the floor of the Senate today. He also rebuked Sen. John McCain's contention that those who oppose the war should have the "courage of their convictions" to stop the funding, saying "I'm so tired of hearing this word about courage. Have the courage to tell the administration 'stop this ridiculous policy you have. We're taking sides in a civil war."

* Sen. Barack Obama upset some potential Jewish supporters recently when he said "nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people” just days before he was set to speak at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference. Generally, Sen. Clinton is said to have received a much stronger response from the pro-Israel crowd after both her and Obama had spoken on Monday.

* Yes, it's true. Maybe-Presidential candidate Sen. Chuck Hagel did indeed attend the International Association of Firefighters' presidential forum today.

Read more »

Meet the hearty holdouts: Here is a list of the nine Republican Senators who voted today against allowing mere debate on a proposal to call for withdrawal the troops by March of 2008:

Allard (R-CO) Bond (R-MO) Bunning (R-KY) Coburn (R-OK) DeMint (R-SC) Enzi (R-WY) Hatch (R-UT) Inhofe (R-OK) Thomas (R-WY)

According to the roll call of the vote, 40 GOP Senators voted in favor of debate. One surprise: Joe Lieberman voted in favor, too.

Little by little, the dam is beginning to crack: The Senate just voted overwhelmingly to allow debate on a proposal that would pull the troops out of Iraq by 2008. The vote was 89-9, according to C-Span.

Perhaps it's a sign of the times -- or a sign of how procedurally screwed up the Senate is -- that it's big news that the Senate has agreed to merely discuss this proposal. But nonetheless, there it is. We'll bring you the roll call in a bit.

Update: Here's a list of the nine GOP Senators who voted against debate today.

Attention, poll junkies: We're told reliably that CNN has a poll coming out this afternoon with national numbers showing Hillary Clinton with a lead over Barack Obama that's in the neighborhood of 15 points. That's roughly in line with the last CNN poll, which showed Hillary beating Obama by 16 points, 34%-18%, in January. We'll keep you posted.

So what's the difference between the current Attorney Purge and the firings of U.S. Attorneys by Bill Clinton in the early ninties? It's not complicated, actually. Listen to someone who was there -- Hillary Clinton, that is -- explain it in an interview with ABC News:

He may have been christened "America's Mayor" by the media, but those who had him as their actual mayor -- that is, New Yorkers -- don't think he'd be as good a President as their current leader, Mike Bloomberg.

A new Quinnipiac University poll finds that New Yorkers say Bloomberg would make a better President than Rudy by a sizeable margin, 46%-31%. Polling director Maurice Carroll: "America's Mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, doesn't score all that well where he really was the mayor."

Senate Republican leaders are making a big push to raise cash in preparation for the 2008 Senate races by staging a burst of big-ticket fundraisers this month designed to shore up vulnerable GOP incumbents, Roll Call reports.

"Led by National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the GOP leadership is helping coordinate a steady stream of receptions and other events for many of their nearly two-dozen Senators facing re-election," the paper says.

GOP Senate leaders think it's particularly important to build up the war chests of incumbents right now because the Presidential race will soon be consuming the attention of GOP donors and fundraisers.

Barack Obama's opponents and rivals are "mining his short voting record" on crime in search of fodder to damage him in his quest for the Presidency, The Hill reports.

“His state legislative voting record has never been the subject of close scrutiny," political analyst Charlie Cook tells the paper, adding that there may be "some troublesome votes, either votes that are controversial or very difficult to explain. How he handles these votes will tell us a lot about the long-term viability of a candidate who has never won a really tough, big race.”

With every main Presidential candidate but Rudy Giuliani set to attend the candidates' forum organized by the International Union of Fire Fighters today, The New York Times weighs in with a longish piece on the dim view some first responders have of Rudy Giuliani's allegedly sterling and heroic 9/11 performance.

The New York City firefighters and police officers "who know Mr. Giuliani best" say he tried "to cut short the effort to find victims’ remains in the World Trade Center wreckage," the paper says. "They also contend that his administration mishandled the development of a radio system that could have saved lives on Sept. 11, and that Mr. Giuliani blundered in putting the city’s emergency command center in the trade center."

If at first you don't succeed...

With their counterparts in the House making slow progress towards a vote on binding legislation aimed at halting the Iraq war, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a test vote today on the question of whether to allow debate on a measure that would set a target date of March 2008 for troop withdrawal, the Associated Press reports.

Until now, GOP Senators have succeeded in blocking debate with procedural maneuvers. Though there are signs that some Republicans will vote to allow debate this time, the AP adds that "GOP leaders are expected to insist that Reid's resolution need 60 votes to pass - a requirement that will likely doom the resolution."

This is pretty amusing. Fred Hiatt's Washington Post editorial page has managed to endorse the idea of Congressional oversight -- provided that this oversight have no meaningful consequences. Check it out -- it's here.

We just heard back from the Rudy campaign -- they're not commenting on the Attorney Purge.

One of the key selling points in Rudy's crime-fighting bio is that he was a U.S. Attorney from 1983 to 1989. He's the only Presidential candidate with this distinction. Because of this, we think we should be hearing from him on the Attorney scandal and the White House's role in it. So we contacted the Rudy campaign earlier today requesting a statement.

Now Rudy spokesperson Maria Camella has just gotten back to us and told us there will be no statement. Ms. Camella didn't say whether the Rudy camp has any intention of releasing one. Nor, however, did she rule out one in the future. But for now, it's Nada.

That now makes two GOP Presidential candidates who are declining to comment on this -- Rudy and Mitt Romney. No word yet from McCain's people.

So that's where we are. Will any reporters press the Rudy campaign for a statement on this?

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

* Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney appeared on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes" last night, where he slammed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's promise to appoint "originalist judges" while still being pro-choice. Romney observed that "being pro-life is, of course, broader than just the kind of judges you appoint."

* Ben Smith reports that in an effort to mock Fox News, the president of Air America Radio, Mark Green, sent a letter this morning to four state Republican parties offering to host and broadcast their upcoming presidential debates. Green suggested that working with Air America would allow the local GOP groups to "both embrace free debate and stick it to Stalin at the same time."

* In his upcoming memoir, former John Edwards consultant Bob Shrum writes that he regrets pushing Edwards to vote for the 2002 Iraq war resolution as part of a political calculation. Edwards' spokesman David Ginsberg disputes Shrum's account of the vote, saying ""John Edwards cast his vote based on the advice of national security advisers and the intelligence he was given, not political advisers."

* Rudy Giuliani picked up a slew of California endorsements today, including former L.A. mayor Richard Riordan, comedian Dennis Miller and U.S. Rep. Jerry Lewis.

* Giuliani was on the defense yesterday over his relationship to NYC firefighters during a press conference, saying he has "a real bond with firefighters." Coinciding with Giuliani's presser was the release of a video on YouTube featuring representatives of NYC police and firefighters saying Giuliani "absolutely [does] not" deserve to be called "America's Mayor."

* Mitt Romney picked up a major financial supporter today when Ted Welch, possibly the most powerful fundraiser in the South, signed on to the former Massachusetts governor's campaign. Apparently Welch was initially leaning towards supporting Sen. John McCain, but McCain's support of Sen. Trent Lott for Minority Whip proved too much and Welch changed his mind.

More after the jump.

Read more »

As we first reported here some time ago, Bill Clinton is standing in as the star attraction at a series of elite high-dollar fundraisers for his wife's Presidential campaign -- and a major one will take place tonight in Manhattan.

Top Hillary fundraiser Hassan Nemazee, who's chairing tonight's event, tells me that Bill (and not Hillary) is the special guest at an intimate, big-ticket gathering at the Harry Cipriani restaurant on Fifth Avenue. The event is expected to raise around $500,000 for Hillary's campaign, a large haul for a smallish fundraiser.

The event is expected to have in the neighborhood of 100 guests -- some contributions are coming in from non-attendees, too -- and the gathering will be co-chaired by top Dem donor Robert Zimmerman.

As we noted recently, Hillary enjoys the unique circumstances of having as a spouse a former President who's at least as big a fundraising draw as the candidate herself -- meaning she can be out campaigning or raising cash separately while Bill scoops up money at his own small but lucrative events. That will be on display tonight yet again.

Yep -- John Edwards is first out of the box. Again. A statement just out from his campaign makes him the first of the Dems to demand that Alberto Gonzales step down:

"Today's news is only the latest and most disturbing sign of the politicization of justice under President Bush. From the abuse of investigative authority under the Patriot Act to the unconstitutional imprisonment of the Guantanamo Bay detainees and illegal torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Bagram Air Force Base, this president has consistently shown contempt for the rule of law. "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales betrayed his public trust by playing politics when his job is to enforce and uphold the law. By violating that trust, he's done a great disservice to his office. If White House officials ordered this purge, he should have refused them. If they insisted, he should have resigned in protest. Attorney General Gonzales should certainly resign now."

Edwards, recall, was the first to pull out of the Fox-hosted debate. Let's face it -- the guy is making what's shaping up as a very credible bid for the "had enough, let's fight back on all fronts" wing of the Dem primary electorate.

We've just heard back from the Romney campaign: He won't be commenting on the Attorney Purge or the White House's role in it.

Romney spokesman Kevin Madden emailed us a few minutes ago, referring us to the White House or the Department of Justice.

Again: Shouldn't we be hearing from all the Presidential candidates -- particularly those who belong to President Bush's party -- about this?

It's time to ask the question: When will Rudy Giuliani comment on the White House's role in the Attorney Purge?

Rudy aspires to occupy the White House, obviously, but he's also making his tenure as U.S. Attorney a key piece of his record as crime fighter, one of his chief rationales for running for President. From his campaign biography:

The Crime Fighter

After the inauguration of Ronald Reagan in 1981, Rudy was named Associate Attorney General, the third highest position in the Department of Justice. He supervised all of the U.S. Attorney Offices and their federal law enforcement agencies, including the Bureau of Corrections, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and the U.S. Marshals.

In 1983, Rudy became United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, where he spearheaded successful efforts against organized crime, white collar criminals, drug dealers and corrupt elected officials. Some of his best known cases include the groundbreaking mafia prosecutions in the "Pizza Connection" and "The Commission" cases, Wall Street corruption cases, and the convictions of corrupt political figures. Few U.S. Attorneys in history can match his record.

Shouldn't we all hear what Rudy thinks of the Attorney Purge and the White House's role in it? We've contacted Rudy's campaign, and asked for a statement. Nothing yet.

Relatedly, when are any of the GOP Presidential candidates going to weigh in on the scandal? How long can they go without commenting? Isn't the media curious to know what they think?

Two of the leading Dem candidates have weighed in already -- but shouldn't the campaigns of members of the President's political party say something about this? We've put in requests to the McCain and Romney camps as well. Stay with us.

Compare and contrast time. The Democratic Presidential candidates are beginning to weigh in on the White House's involvement in the U.S. Attorneys' firings.

Hillary Clinton:

“With the White House now acknowledging a direct role in the Justice Department’s U.S. Attorney firings, the president must affirmatively step forward to explain what he is doing to address the politicization of our prosecutorial system and what role he and his aides played in this controversy.

"The president is the chief executive of the country and this matter goes to the heart of his ability to manage our federal law enforcement and U.S. Attorney system. It is imperative that the president act swiftly to explain what role the White House played in this situation, hold those who acted inappropriately accountable, and take responsibility.”

Barack Obama:

"I opposed Mr. Gonzalez's nomination, in part, because he had shown in his role as White House Counsel a penchant for subverting justice to serve the President's political goals, and I feared that in an Attorney General. Sadly, the latest revelations underscore my concern. Americans deserve to know who in the White House is pulling the strings at the Department of Justice, and why. Anyone involved should appear under oath and answer these questions."

Main differences: Note Obama's call for "anyone" involved to answer questions "under oath," as well as Hillary's decidedly more direct criticism of the President himself.

Breaking with the Religious Right activists he's been courting — as well as the Jeb Bush political organization he's mined so well in Florida — Mitt Romney now says the government shouldn't have intervened in the Terri Schiavo case, The St. Petersburg Times reports.

Reporting on details of an interview of Romney by a local TV station in Florida, the Times quoted Romney objecting to actions like "Terri's Law" for the same reason he dislikes a pro-active judiciary: "I generally think that it's not a good idea for courts to legislate. Nor is it great idea for legislatures to adjudicate in a specific circumstance."

Meanwhile, Terri Schiavo's brother Bobby Schindler, a celebrity among religious conservatives, has now endorsed Sam Brownback, lashing out in a statement at Romney's Schiavo stance. "Mitt Romney’s alleged pro-life conversion evidently does not to apply to all human life," said Schindler. "The pro-life movement needs a leader we can trust in 2008 and I know Sam Brownback is that leader."

A new CNN poll finds that Rudy Giuliani has widened his lead over John McCain -- he now boasts nearly double McCain's support, leading him 34%-18%. The numbers:

Giuliani 34% McCain 18% Gingrich 9% Romney 9%

Giuliani's current lead of 16 points is a dramatic leap from the spread in another CNN poll taken in January, which found Rudy leading by only six points, 32%-24%.

It looks like Al Franken may be closing in on GOP Senator Norm Coleman. A new Rasmussen poll finds that Franken has edged to within 10 points of Coleman. The sitting GOP Senator now leads the Dem comedian 46%-36%. The spread is much tighter than the 22-point lead Coleman had over Franken in a SurveyUSA poll from about a month ago. What's more, the new Rasumssen poll shows Coleman under 50%, a danger point for any incumbent.

Republicans view their party's political standing with increasing anxiety and are generally unsatisfied with the crop of GOP Presidential candidates, a massive New York Times poll released today finds. Some key numbers:

* Forty percent of Republicans think Dems will win the White House in 2008

* Fifty-eight percent of Republicans think "flexibility about when to withdraw" from Iraq is important in a Presidential candidate, versus only 39% who think a commitment is important

* Nearly six in ten Republican voters want more choices for Presidential candidates than are present in the current field

* The GOP's approval rating is an anemic 34%, while the Dem approval rating is 13 points higher, at 47%

Full poll here.

The big New York Times poll we posted below has a bunch of interesting numbers that we'll be checking out today. For now, here's a real doozy: Dick Cheney's favorability rating is all of 18 percent. Our keen math skills indicate that this translates into less than one in five people viewing the Veep favorably. That's down from 21% a month or so ago.

Meanwhile, President Bush's approval rating in the new poll has edged up to 34% from 29% a month ago.

Update: The post has been revised to reflect the fact that the question about Cheney referred to his favorability rating.

Late update: Ana Marie Cox has a fun reaction: "If he had feelings, I'm sure they'd be hurt by this."

Hillary Clinton has built a network of lobbyists and D.C. insiders that dwarfs that of her closest rival, Barack Obama, though many Beltway types are withholding support for either candidate as they wait to see how the race plays out, The Hill reports.

"Clinton has the support of several of the most prominent Democratic lobbyists, such as Thomas Boggs, Pat Griffin, Joel Johnson, Steve Ricchetti, and Mike Berman, who can raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for her campaign," the paper says. "Citing what he suggests is a new brand of politics, Obama has taken an extraordinary step for a presidential candidate by declining contributions from lobbyists. He is even shunning money they might raise for him from non-lobbyists."

Obama will be forced to rely more heavily on the internet for fundraising -- a task that could be complicated by John Edwards, who's making a serious bid to be the netroots candidate.

House Dem leaders looking to win GOP defections for their bill to end the Iraq war will be putting "pressure on Republicans to either support them or offer their own proposals for changing the course of a war that polls suggest has become increasingly unpopular to members of both parties," Roll Call reports.

As the GOP House leadership ponders its response strategy, its efforts are being complicated by the fact that "the official GOP position in both the House and Senate is one that does not exactly sit well with many of the rank and file, given many Republicans expressed skepticism or opposition to President Bush’s plan to send more troops into Iraq to try to stem the violence in Baghdad." Full story here.

We've just obtained a copy of parts of the long-awaited House Dem leadership's bill on Iraq -- the one that's been the subject of days and days of behind-the-scenes battling among House Democrats. You can view excerpts in our TPM Document Collection.

The key points about the bill you need to know for now are as follows:

First, though the bill mandates withdrawal by Fall 2008 at the latest, it's going to be at least partly a disappointment to some House liberals. That's because language that was in earlier drafts that would have clipped funding after the deadline -- as opposed to merely declaring the war illegal -- has been taken out.

House leaders will argue that the bill does do its job, because it declares the war illegal beyond a certain date. But liberal House sources say this removed language was critical in ending the war in practice, because it would enforce the war's end with the power of the purse rather than requiring a trip to court to force an end to the war should Bush insist on keeping it going in defiance of the legislation.

Second, in another disappointment to House liberals, key language mandating that Bush get Congressional approval before going to war with Iran has been taken out. This was a concession to Blue Dog Dems who fear that if they vote for any measure tying the Commander in Chief's hands in any way, it will make them vulnerable in their moderate districts, a House staffer says.

Despite these two disappointments, a liberal House Dem says that the bill is nonetheless a positive. "It's a positive thing that the Dem caucus has set a date to end the Bush administration's failed policy," this source says. "That said, the political sausage making, the calculations that are required to keep more moderates on board, could make this ultimately less enforceable, and that would be unfortunate."

If this all sounds half-baked, that's because it is -- we only just got a chunk of the bill sent to us, and it's pretty dense stuff. Maybe you can help us out -- you can view the key part of the bill here.

Okay, so we've got a hold of a copy of the Dem House leadership's bill on Iraq. We're told that the Dem leadership was keeping copies of this bill under wraps, but you can view a copy of the relevant pages of the bill in our TPM Document Collection.

The key point is that the basics in the bill as reported in recent days are essentially present in the current version. The bill would compel withdrawal from Iraq by Fall 2008 or earlier.

The key points in the bill are as follows:

(1) The tough enforcement language favored by liberal Dems, which would have forced a withdrawal should the Iraqi government fail to reach the benchmarks laid out by the White House, is not in the bill.

(2) The language that would have mandated that the President get Congressional approval for any attack on Iran has been taken out.

Here is the relevant section of the supplemental. Enforcement language is
not included.

Prohibition for funds for permanent bases and US control of Iraqi oil were
left in. Language on Iran was taken out.

For those of you who -- like us -- are Talmudic followers of the internecine conflicts among House Dems over what to do about Iraq, here's a bit of news: Several people on the Hill tell us that a hard copy of the Dem leadership's legislative language on Iraq is now circulating. This means we'll soon get a look at the House Dem leadership's approach -- in black and white legislative detail! We're trying to get a copy -- we'll keep you posted.

Update: Another Hill source tells us that the bill hasn't been printed, but is likely to be in hard copy this evening. So it's coming soon.

A couple weeks after John McCain was a no-show at the influential Conservative Political Action Conference, the Arizonan is snubbing another important conservative constituency: the wealthy economic conservative donors at the Club for Growth. The Club has scheduled its winter conference for March 29-April 1 in Palm Beach, and it will feature major officeholders and donors, as well as the top GOP Presidential candidates — not including McCain.

The snub is right there in the Club for Growth's press release announcing the event, which says: "Joining the Club for Growth for its policy forums are declared or potential presidential candidates former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney; former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani; Kansas Senator Sam Brownback; and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Arizona Senator John McCain was invited to attend, but declined."

It's unclear why McCain is skipping an event that would feature so many establishment donors, but his relationship with some fiscal conservatives has been strained due in part to his advocacy of campaign-finance reform, his 2001 vote against the first Bush tax cuts. A spokesman for the McCain campaign was not immediately available for comment.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell isn't exactly optimistic about his party's chances of regaining the majority in 2008. In an interview with Roll Call, McConnell acknowledged the host of difficulties faced by the GOP Caucus: too few vulnerable Dem incumbents; the proliferation of Republican incumbents in blue states; and the possibility of GOP retirements. Said McConnell: "Could we get it back? It would have to be a good day."

Rudy Giuliani has picked up his first endorsement from a current GOP Senator — and he's a major Southern conservative from Louisiana, no less. Rudy's campaign announced today that Rudy's earned the backing of Senator David Vitter, who will server as regional chair for the Giuliani campaign in the South — exactly the region where he needs the support of people like Vitter.

At a press conference today, Vitter reportedly said that Rudy was okay for social conservatives because he “would appoint the best federal judges of all the major candidates” — precisely the argument Rudy's campaign has been making.

And while Vitter allowed that he disagreed with Giuliani “on some very significant social issues,” he added: “These are really important matters to me and many people I represent. But after numerous personal meetings with him, it is very clear to me that he is not running for President to advance any liberal social agenda.” It remains to be seen whether the mere idea that Rudy isn't advancing a liberal social agenda will be enough to appeal to other Southern conservatives.

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

* YouTube strikes again, this time with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as the victim. Footage of 1989 speech where Giuliani declared "there must be public funding for abortion" was posted on the video-hosting website on Sunday. Publicly-funded abortion is a big no-no for the social conservatives that make up a significant slice of GOP primary voters.

* Rudy backed out of 23 planned motivational speeches recently that would have netted him roughly $2.3 million. The decision was made in order to avoid potential conflicts of interests while he campaigns for President.

* In the two years before officially announcing his bid for President, former Masschusetts Gov. Mitt Romney began making significant donations to conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation and the National Review Institute, who could potentially influence activists on the Right in his favor. Romney had never previously donated to such groups, so the donations and their timing have raised the specter that Romney is using his considerable wealth — estimated at $500 million — to buy favor with the organizations.

* While Fox News chief Roger Ailes' recent Obama as Osama joke is the reason Democrats cited for pulling out of a Fox News-sponsored debate, Sen. Barack Obama himself says he was not very offended by the joke. "I didn't take great offense at the joke," Obama told the Associated Press. "I have been called worse."

* Rep. Dennis Kucinich criticized Democrats yesterday for cancelling the Nevada debate co-sponsored by Fox News. "If you want to be the President of the United States, you can't be afraid to deal with people with whom you disagree politically," Kucinich said

* Texas Rep. Ron Paul made his candidacy for President official today on CSPAN's "Washington Journal." Paul previously ran for President as a Libertarian in 1988, but this time around he will seek the Republican nomination.

More after the jump.

Read more »

Senator Chuck Hagel, the Senate's leading antiwar Republican, announced today that -- well, that he's open to running for President, but didn't want to think about it now and would reveal his intentions sometime in the future.

If Hagel's statement was designed to address speculation that he might run in 2008, it kept that speculation alive by asserting, in effect, that too much is going on in the world to allow him any time to think about politics right now, so sit tight and he'll make his plans known another day:

America is facing its most divisive and difficult issue since Vietnam -- the war in Iraq, an issue that I have been deeply involved in. I want to keep my focus on helping find a responsible way out of this tragedy, and not divert my energy, efforts and judgment with competing political considerations.

I am here today to announce that my family and I will make a decision on my political future later this year.

In making this announcement, I believe there will still be political options open to me at a later date.

Full statement after the jump.

Read more »

Through a combination of horse-trading, cajoling and the persuasion of one member at a time, House Dem leaders are painstakingly working their way towards a compromise on legislation that would mandate that the troops are out of Iraq by Fall 2008 at the latest, The Washington Post reports.

"Leaders are counting on winning all but a dozen of the 43 conservative Blue Dog Democrats and all but a dozen of the 75 or so members of the liberal Out of Iraq Caucus," the paper says. "Then, Democratic leaders are hoping, enough Republicans will break ranks to put them over the top."

House Dem caucus chair Rahm Emanuel tells the paper that passage of the legislation is within reach: "There's nothing guaranteed in life, but I feel very good." The back-room hashing out of the bill continues today, and the legislation may be written up and readied for "markup" this week. We'll be bringing you more on this throughout the day.

Buried in Robert Novak's column today is a surprising claim: Bill Clinton was one of the key people who recommended the Hillary campaign's brutally tough pushback when Barack Obama fundraiser David Geffen whacked the Clintons in a now-legendary interview with Maureen Dowd.

Novak writes: "The sharp rebuke to Hollywood producer David Geffen, the erstwhile Clinton friend now backing Obama, was approved unanimously during a campaign conference call presided over by consultant Mark Penn. Bill Clinton was not on that call. But the former president, described by Democratic sources as `incandescent' over Geffen's remarks, recommended the harsh response."

The prospect of a February 5 "super-primary" involving a host of contests across the country is forcing the Presidential campaigns to revamp their campaign strategies and rethink everything from fundraising to campaigning schedules, today's New York Times reports.