Report: Private House Dem Polls Predict More Gains In 2008
Robert Novak: "Private House Democratic polls of the 50 most competitive congressional districts project a gain of 9 to 11 seats in the 2008 elections that would be an unprecedented further surge by the party following its 2006 gain of 30 seats that won control of the House."

DNC Refuses To Sanction June Debate
The Hotline reports that the DNC is standing firm on their vow not to sanction any debates until July. Since Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have pledged to abide by the DNC's schedule, then it's very likely that an upcoming June debate in New Hampshire will feature all the candidates except Clinton and Obama — which could potentially benefit John Edwards, Bill Richardson and other candidates. (This past week's South Carolina debate was agreed to before this rule was established.)

Fred Thompson: U.S. Should Aid Revolution In Iran
The Associated Press reports that Fred Thompson said the United States should give aid to anti-government efforts in Iran, accusing Iran of "playing a large part in killing our soldiers" in Iraq. Referring to Iranian dissidents, Thompson said, "There is a chance they may mobilize themselves, and we need to assist them if that happens."

Clinton Campaign Hits Obama On Terror Response
The Washington Post reports that Hillary Clinton's campaign sees an opening in Barack Obama's response to a question at Thursday's debate about a hypothetical terrorist attack, when Obama focussed on helping the victims and gave only slight mention to retaliation. "Hillary was the candidate who demonstrated that she would know how to respond if the country was attacked," the Clinton campaign is saying.

Dem Candidates Work Clyburn Event
The New York Times reports that the Democratic candidates spent yesterday at House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn's (D-SC) fish fry event, following Thursday night's debate with up close, retail politics. The Times noted another important element of the event: "The political purpose is clear: few candidates dare to miss it, considering they are working to win Mr. Clyburn’s endorsement."

McCain Chokes Up While Hearing Troop Story In Iowa
The Des Moines Register reports that John McCain succumbed to a strong showing of emotion when hearing from a woman about her son serving in Iraq. "I know you pray every night - and we will too," McCain said. While admitting, "I don't claim to be immune to sentimentality," McCain is nevertheless sticking with his support of Bush Administration policies.

Millender-McDonald Funeral To See Large Congressional Turnout
The Hill reports that the late Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald's (D-CA) funeral on Monday will see a large turnout of 95 members of Congress, who will be transported to the funeral on military aircrat. Millender-McDonald, who chaired the House Administration Committee, died last week of cancer.

• Via Atrios, Glenn Greenwald discovers that Lieberman consultant Dan Gerstein is up to his old tricks again. The Washington Post quotes Gerstein bashing Lieberman's blogospheric foes without disclosing that Gerstein is one of Lieberman's paid advisers.

• Slate's John Dickerson says the Hillary campaign has been doing some creative editing to make her look like Commander-in-Chief material.

• Salon notes that White House counsel Dan Bartlett is continuing to peddle the idea that the American people don't think members of Congress should determine foreign policy over the President — despite contrary poll data.

• John Edwards has given an ultimatum to his Democratic rivals: When Bush vetoes the Iraq withdrawal timetable, send him another one, and refuse to pass a "clean" funding bill without such withdrawal deadlines.

• NRSC chairman Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) is putting together a road show of vulnerable senators for a joint fundraising tour. Sens. Norm Coleman (MN), Susan Collins (ME), Gordon Smith (OR), and John Sununu (NH) will launch their tour in late may, hitting up Houston, Dallas, and Las Vegas for out-of-state donations. As The New Hampshire Union Leader points out, this is not a new tactic. President Bush memorably dubbed a previous troupe of touring senators “The Three Amigos” in 2002. All this comes at a time when Democrats are wildly out fundraising Republicans, having raised almost twice as much cash in the first months of 2007. — Kate Redburn

• Charges have been dismissed against Jim Webb aide Phillip Thompson, who had been arrested for bringing a loaded gun belonging to the Senator into the Russell Senate Office Building.

• A new poll from the Tarrance Group (R) has Governor Ernie Fletcher (R-KY) up 51%-29% over his primary challenger, defeated former Congresswoman Ann Northup. The catch: The Tarrance group is the Fletcher campaign's official pollster, and the Fletcher campaign were the ones who released it — so take it with a grain of salt.

• A new SurveyUSA poll shows that 91% of New Jerseyans think Governor Jon Corzine should get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt in the accident that nearly killed him. Meanwhile, Corzine has announced he will pay the full costs of his healthcare, from the emergency care to his physical rehabilitation, rather than have it charged to the taxpayers.

Barack Obama picks up a big media get: The addition of Jim Margolis and firm GMMB to the campaign media team.

From Obama's release: “This is more than a campaign for president,” said Margolis. “It’s about a fundamental change in our politics. Senator Obama represents the best of America and we’re excited to join David Axelrod, AKP&D Message and Media and thousands of people across the nation in bringing change to Washington."

Margolis has worked for the DCCC and his firm played a key role in Bill Clinton's 1992 Presidential campaign.

A reader points out an interesting moment from yesterday's Dem debate. Commenting on his vote to authorize the Iraq War, Edwards said this:

"I was wrong to vote for this war. Unfortunately, I will have to live with that forever. The lesson that I learned from it is that to put more faith in my own judgment."

This passed unnoticed, but it's pretty interesting. Edwards' suggestion here is that his own judgment led him to the conclusion that voting against the war was the right thing to do. So who was he listening to?

This gets even more interesting when you recall that last month Kerry-Edwards adviser Bob Shrum released a book alleging that Edwards voted for the war only because his advisers said he should and that he was skeptical of the vote. At the time, Edwards' spokesperson adamantly denied this, saying that Edwards had "cast his vote based on the advice of national security advisers and the intelligence he was given, not political advisers." In other words, his vote was at least partly based on his reading of the intel.

But yesterday Edwards seemed to reinforce the idea that he had voted for the war on the strength of what he heard from advisers and against his own judgment. So whose judgment was he listening to? Is it possible Shrum's account is true? Or did Edwards base his vote on the judgment of his national security advisers alone and disregard his own judgments made based on the intelligence?

This needn't necessarily reflect badly on Edwards; it remains murky. The point is, given Edwards' willingness to acknowledge that he was wrong -- and given the centrality of the vote to the current campaign -- I'd genuinely like to know more about what went into Edwards' decision-making at the time.

Update: And don't miss this catch by Ben Smith on another intriguing aspect of Edwards' performance.

Yesterday we flagged an Associated Press story quoting Mitt Romney saying the following about Osama Bin Laden: "It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person."

We noted yesterday that such a quote coming from a Democrat would have been broadly covered by the big news organizations and probably would have triggered a major outcry.

Curiously, though, Romney's quote has been met with near-total silence.

A news search shows there hasn't been any coverage of it beyond the original AP write-up yesterday, where the comment itself was buried towards the bottom of the piece.

There's been almost no mention of it whatsoever in any of the places where one would expect such a thing to provoke outrage — that is, in the conservative media and blogosphere. There are no mentions of it on Power Line Blog, Town Hall, InsaPundit, Human Events, or notably the site of Hugh Hewitt, who has written a pro-Romney book.

Indeed, the only condemnation we can find of Romney's remark comes in a single post on the National Review's group blog, The Corner. Byron York writes: "Perhaps Romney should watch the tape of the planes hitting the towers again."

Even so, The Corner devotes far more chatter to Barack Obama's answer to a question last night about a potential terrorist attack, than to Romney's arguably much greater offense.

Why the radio-silence on Romney?

Sen. John Ensign is worried about some of his Republican colleagues. That’s why as NRSC chairman he’s putting together a merry band of vulnerable senators for a joint fundraising tour. Sens. Norm Coleman (MN), Susan Collins (ME), Gordon Smith (OR), and John Sununu (NH) will launch their tour in late may, hitting up Houston, Dallas, and Las Vegas for out-of-state donations.
As the Manchester Union Leader points out, this is not a new tactic. President Bush memorably dubbed a previous troupe of touring senators “The Three Amigos” in 2002.
All this comes at a time when Democrats are wildly out fundraising Republicans, having raised almost twice as much cash in the first months of 2007.

The other day we referenced a poll by Senate Dems which found that GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell's Iraq positions were out of step with those of his constituents in the state of Kentucky.

Now the DSCC has released some new numbers from the same poll -- numbers it claims show that McConnell's vulnerable to a challenge:

I know it's a long way off, but if next year's election for U.S. Senate were held today, would you definitely vote to re-elect Mitch McConnell, probably vote to re-elect him, probably vote for someone new or definitely vote for someone new?

TotalRe-Elect: 47%

Total Someone New: 44%

Numbers showing support for generic opponents are usually bogus -- people vote for real people in elections, not generic ones -- but the fact that McConnell's support is in the below-50% danger zone could be significant. Keeping in mind, of course, that this is a partisan poll.

And speaking of debates...

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are the only two Dem candidates who have not agreed to participate in a debate in June in New Hampshire. And the flagship political newspaper in this all-important primary state -- the Union Leader -- is not at all pleased. The paper rips the two in a new editorial today:

We Granite Staters take this tradition seriously. That two major candidates for President have refused the invitation to take part in this process that is so important to New Hampshire and, because of the New Hampshire primary, the country, indicates that perhaps they take the democratic process here, and the New Hampshire primary itself, for granted.

...The people of New Hampshire will remember that when it was time to hold themselves up for a side-by-side comparison with their competitors, Sens. Obama and Clinton considered themselves too important to show up.

Obama and Hillary have both said they'll only participate in DNC-sponsored debates in hopes that the DNC will focus the process, and are urging the DNC to sanction the upcoming New Hampshire one.

SUSA Poll: Obama The Big Winner Of The Debate — And Gravel The Big Loser
A SurveyUSA poll taken last night of debate watchers in South Carolina shows Barack Obama as the big winner, with 31% saying he won the night. Hillary Clinton followed with 24%, and John Edwards at 14%. No other candidate broke 10 points. Mike Gravel can walk away with an honor of sorts: 17% said he was one who lost at the debate, ahead of any other candidate.

The Guardian: Hillary The Winner
The Guardian's correspondent thinks it's an easy call for who benefitted the most from the debate last night. "Hillary Clinton emerged as the clear winner from the first debate between the Democratic candidates in the 2008 presidential race - ahead of her main rival Barack Obama - according to those present in the audience," he writes. "She appeared to be the most comfortable of the eight runners in the 90-minute televised debate from the South Carolina university campus as she dealt with a series of questions ranging from how she would handle another terrorist attack on the US to her vote in 2002 backing the invasion of Iraq."

Hillary Tacitly Owns Up To Iraq Mistake
In last night's debate, Hillary Clinton all but admitted that her stance in 2002 regarding Iraq was a mistake. As quoted in USA Today, Clinton responded that one of her biggest mistakes was, "Believing the president when he said he would go to the United Nations and put inspectors into Iraq to determine whether they had WMD." On the other hand, John Edwards was far more blunt in answering the same question, "I was wrong to vote for this war. Unfortunately, I'll have to live with that forever."

Clyburn: The Top Candidates Did Okay, Second-Tier Benefitted
House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, arguably South Carolina's most important Democrat, gave a generally favorable review to the top three candates, and a compliment to the second tier. Clyburn told The State, "I don’t think any of the top tier candidates did themselves any harm, and I think the second tier candidates did themselves a lot of good."

Biden Wins Applause For Simple "Yes" Answer
Joe Biden's simple, humorous answer to whether he posesses the self-discipline needed to behave on the world stage, and to control his usual verbosity — "Yes" — was noticed by sources ranging from the non-partisan Chuck Todd to even the right-wing TownHall.com, which praised him for having "the best 'one-liner'" of the debate.

Obama Addresses Israel-Palestine Question
The Chicago Tribune notes that Barack Obama addressed a recent remark that some viewed as overly sympathetic to Palestinians, and not enough to Israeli victims of terrorism. "What I said is, nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region."

Right Wing May Hit Obama Over Terrorist-Attack Question
National Review's Byron York gives a hint of how Republicans could attack Barack Obama over his answer to a question about how the country's military stance would change in case of another terrorist attack at home. Obama's answer focused first on emergency response for the victims, followed by the use of intelligence networks to "take potentially some action to dismantle that network." York's verdict: "Obama’s answer to a question of how, as commander-in-chief, he would change America’s 'military stance' in response to an attack by al Qaeda did not involve using the military."

Yepsen: Debate Helpful To Second-Tier Candidates
The Des Moines Registers's David Yepsen said the real victories in last night's debate belonged to the second tier. "The back of the pack candidates - Chris Dodd, Joseph Biden and Bill Richardson - did themselves more good than front-runners Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards," Yepsen writes. "Dodd looked and sounded the most presidential. Biden used a little humor to knock down his image as a windbag. Richardson, who seemed to have trouble hearing, was good on foreign policy questions."

WaPo: Kucinich And Gravel Made The Others Look Stronger By Comparison
The Washington Post asserts that the top six candidates at last night's debate — Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Biden and Dodd — were able to benefit from the presence of the two left-wing stragglers, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, simply by virtue of looking better on defense by standing next to them. "The challenges from the liberal flank allowed almost all the others to assert that, despite their criticisms of President Bush's Iraq policy, they are ready to use military force to retaliate against future terrorist attacks."

Check out these numbers in the new New York Times/CBS poll:

Currently, President Bush and Congress disagree about what to do about U.S. troop levels in Iraq. Who do you think should have the final say about troop levels in Iraq, the President or Congress?

President: 35%

Congress: 57%

And:

Do you think the United States should or should not set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq sometime in 2006?

Should: 64%

Should not: 32%

Bush's overall job approval rating? Thirty-two percent.

• Rasmussen finds that a solid majority, 57%, either wants to pull out of Iraq right now or set a firm deadline for withdrawal.

• Rasmussen also finds John McCain's favorability in a slump — only 49% somewhat or very favorable, to 43% somewhat or very unfavorable.

• Mitt Romney is publicly mocking John Edwards' expensive haircuts: "You know I think John Edwards was right. There are two Americas. There is the America where people pay $400 for a haircut and then there is everybody else."

• Both parties will make New Jersey's 7th District a priority next year. Incumbent Mike Ferguson (R) barely beat back Dem State Rep. Linda Stender, who is expected to challenge him in a rematch.

• Former Congresswoman Ann Northup (R-KY) outraised incumbent Governor Ernie Fletcher (R) in the last quarter, increasing the momentum for her primary challenge.

• The Draft Fred Thompson 2008 Committee says that a strong majority of Texas State House Republicans — 54 out of 81 — are on board with their effort to convince Thompson to run.

• The New Hampshire State Senate voted to legalize same-sex civil unions, on a party-line 14-10 vote. Democratic Governor John Lynch has said he will sign the bill, which has already passed in the House..

• Mitt Romney says it's wrong to criticize him for changing issue stances from his experience over time — after all, McCain and Giuliani have, too.

• Jim Gilmore officially launched his longshot bid for the Republican nomination.

• Conservative State Assemblyman Michael Doherty appears to be looking at a run against Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) in 2008.

So what do the candidates need to accomplish in the debate that's starting in a few minutes? What will they try to do? We checked in with political consultant Jano Cabrera, who headed up Al Gore's communications operation in Iowa in 2000, was Joe Lieberman's spokesman during the 2004 primary, and was communications director for the DNC during the 2004 general election. Cabrera's thoughts on the imperatives and strategies of each candidate after the jump.

Read more »

"It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person."

— Mitt Romney, in an interview with the Associated Press, saying that the country's safety would not benefit significantly from catching Osama Bin Laden. This quote was buried in the AP article. One wonders what the reaction would be if a Democrat said this.

John McCain appears to still see war and bombs as fodder for jokes. Several days after he sang about bombing Iran, and only a day after he suggested that Rep. Jack Murtha "lighten up" after the Dem critized McCain's joke about I.E.D.s, we now get this from CNN:

At the end of his speech delivered at a flour factory, McCain's campaign cued up the Beach Boys hit "Barbara Ann," a not-so-veiled reference to the senator's rendition of the song last week when he jokingly changed the words to "Bomb Iran" in response to a question about whether it was time to attack Iran.

A McCain aide told CNN it was no coincidence that the song was played at the end of the event.

"We thought it would add a little levity," said John Weaver, a senior McCain strategist, adding, "And to show we are not going to get pushed around on things like that."

Right -- why should McCain and his advisers let themselves "get pushed around" by anyone demanding that a man auditioning for the job of Commander in Chief not make light of matters of death and war?

Check out these nice charts in the new Pew poll we referenced below: They go beyond simple voter preferences for the Democratic and Republican candidates, breaking down voter attitudes by asking which candidates possess a range of different virtues.

Among Dems Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama 35%-26%, followed by John Edwards at 16%. And she appears to have a strong lead over the rest of the field in most categories. But there's one category where she narrowly loses out to Obama: Most inspiring. Take a look:

On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani has 33% to John McCain's 22%, with no other candidate breaking ten percent. Like Hillary, Rudy leads McCain in almost every category, losing out to McCain on experience only:

New Pew poll, just out today:

With battle lines drawn over legislation funding the Iraq war, the public is showing little appetite for compromise. Overall, a solid majority of Americans (59%) continue to say they want their representative to support a bill calling for a U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by August 2008, while just a third want their representative to vote against such legislation...

The public remains pessimistic about the current situation in Iraq and is dubious that the recent troop surge will improve things there. For the first time, a majority (51%) of Americans say they believe the U.S. will definitely or probably fail in establishing a stable democratic government in Iraq.

As was the case in March, only about a quarter (24%) say the troop increase is making things better in Iraq; just 34% believe it will improve things in the long run. In addition, nearly as many Americans believe a terrorist attack on the U.S. is more likely if American troops stay in Iraq for many years, as say an attack is more likely if U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq while the country remains unstable (41% vs. 45%, respectively).

Oh, and one other number: More Republicans (49%) prefer a candidate who will adopt different Iraq policies from Bush than prefer one who will continue them (44%).

Here come the reactions from the Dem Presidential candidates to the Senate's passage today of the Iraq withdrawal bill.

Here's some of Barack Obama's statement. Check out the first sentence:

“We are one signature away from ending the Iraq War. President Bush must listen to the will of the American people and sign this bill so that our troops can come home.”...

“All of us have been touched by the heroic sacrifices troops have made in service to our country. With the stroke of a pen, President Bush can bring them home to the families who love them and to a country ready to give honor them for their service.”

And here's John Edwards:

"Today, the Senate passed a bill that would fund the war in Iraq while bringing the conflict to a close. Both Houses of Congress have now given voice to the will of the American people that we must end the war in Iraq. The President has said he will veto this legislation, which will defy the American people and deny our troops the funding they need. The President will be the one blocking support for our troops, not Congress. If the President does proceed on this stubborn path, Congress must not back down in a false game of chicken. They should send the same bill back to the President -- and should do this again and again, as many times as it takes for him to understand that the American people are right and the war must be brought to an end."

Hard to believe he's really gonna veto it, but of course he will. This Presidency has really lost its ability to shock and surprise, hasn't it?

Delusional or outright lying. There's simply no other possibility here. Listen to GOP Rep. David Dreier talk about Harry Reid's assertion that the war is "lost":

Dreier:

The statement by the Majority Leader of the United States Senate that this war has been lost...I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the American people are convinced that we can be successful.

No, Mr. Dreier, they aren't.

No, Mr. Dreier, they aren't.

No, Mr. Dreier.

They aren't.

The voting's done. The Senate just passed the Iraq war supplemental, 51-46.

That's right -- for the first time, both Houses of Congress have now passed the same bill mandating withdrawal from Iraq.

Now President Bush has to veto a bill that has majority support in both Houses and has majority support from the American people.

We'll bring you the roll call when it's available.

Update: McCain missed the vote, it turns out.

Late update: Two Republican Senators crossed party lines to support the bill: Chuck Hagel and Gordon Smith.

This is pretty remarkable. Check out these lines from a statement sent out by White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino in response to the House's passage of the Iraq war supplemental spending bill:

Last November, the American people voted for a change in strategy in Iraq – and the President listened. Tonight, the House of Representatives voted for failure in Iraq – and the President will veto its bill.

The American people voted for a change of course, and the President responded with a change of course, i.e., the surge. In other words, the suggestion is that the President gave the American people what they asked for. Never mind that they asked for precisely the opposite change of course that Bush has given them.

This is noteworthy because it shows that this argument has now become a regular staple in the White House repertoire. Recall that Bush himself the other day said this:

Last November the American people said they were frustrated and wanted change in our strategy in Iraq. I listened. Today General David Petraeus is carrying out a strategy that is dramatically different from our previous course. But the American people did not vote for failure, and that is precisely what the Democratic leadership’s bill would guarantee.

The notion that the 2006 elections showed a mandate for the surge has now become a key White House talking point. That such a piece of blatant up-is-downism has become one of the White House's major arguments says all you need to know about the mounting desperation in the pro-war camp.

The voting is gonna start in a few -- at 12:45 PM. We'll bring you the outcome and a roll call as soon as it's available. If you want to watch it, it's on C-Span 2.

Hillary Clinton's campaign now realizes they are not the unstoppable fundraising machine that would dominate the other candidates, Time reports, and they are retooling their organization to compensate.

After being ovetaken in primary fundraising by Barack Obama last Fall, the Clinton campaign has had to examine just how Obama overtook them. Besides the attenion focused on Obama's small donations, he also did a great job in appealing to big-money fundraisers, as well. "He probably did three to four times the number of events she did," said former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe, a Hillary supporter.

And so Hillary's camp will be gearing up smaller, more intimiate events for the $4,600 maximum donors, plus catering to smaller $100 donors, and even approaching people who have already donated to Obama and encouraging them to hedge their bets.

And the Clinton campaign, realizing the Obama poses a serious threat to her campaign, will be emphasizing her own virtues over him, such as her longer experience on the national stage — and they think she will actually be able to outdo the charismatic Obama at debates, with her in-depth knowledge on the issues. "This will be her strongest point. She knows this stuff inside out," said a Hillary strategist.

Haaretz reports:

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, one of the Democratic candidates for president, said Wednesday that he would consider appointing former secretary of state James Baker to be special envoy to the Middle East peace process if elected president.

Richardson's statement came in response to a question from reporters after addressing the National Jewish Democratic Council in Washington...

Richardson added that more diplomacy is needed in the Middle East, and that the past six years of the presidency of George W. Bush have made Israel less secure than it was in the years of Bill Clinton's administration.

I could be wrong, but I don't recall any of the candidates saying that Bush has made Israel less secure. Seems like a good tack to me.

Tonight Is The Night: The First Dem Debate
Tonight will see the first full-fledged Democratic debate (as opposed to cattle call forums that have been held previously) tonight in South Carolina. The Associated Press has a rundown on the candidates' preparations. And the Republican National Committee already has a set of talking points out ready to jab at the Dems and what they might say tonight.

Lieberman: War Critics Would Rather Blame America Than Blame Terrorists
Joe Lieberman has a new guest column today in The Washington Post, in which he says war critics are casting recent violence in Baghdad in the wrong light. "If such an atrocity had been perpetrated in the United States, Europe or Israel, our response would surely have been anger at the fanatics responsible and resolve not to surrender to their barbarism," Lieberman writes. "Unfortunately, because this slaughter took place in Baghdad, the carnage was seized upon as the latest talking point by advocates of withdrawal here in Washington. Rather than condemning the attacks and the terrorists who committed them, critics trumpeted them as proof that Gen. David Petraeus's security strategy has failed and that the war is 'lost.'"

Report: Dem Candidates Covet The Freshman House Members From Iowa and New Hampshire
Roll Call reports that four of the more coveted House endorsements for the Democratic Presidential candidates are New Hampshire's Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter, and Iowa's Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack — freshman members from the two key caucus and primary states. Shea-Porter, who does not plan to make an endorsement, humorously said she is on the fence, "and I’m trying hard not to fall off."

McCain: Rick Renzi Is In My Prayers
The Arizona Republic reports that John McCain was asked aboard his Straight Talk Express bus about embattled Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ), a McCain supporter who has had to resign his committee post's amidst an ethics investigation, and whether Renzi would continue to play a part on the campaign. "Look, Rick obviously has got great difficulties now. I know nothing about his case," McCain said. "He's in my prayers. He's in my prayers. And that's all I'm going to say. All this stuff will come out."

Hillary Endorsed By Major California Hispanic Politician
The Associated Press reports that Hillary Clinton has been endorsed by Fabian Nunez, the Speaker of the California State Assembly. Nunez will serve as a national co-chair of the campaign, and will likely play a large role in helping the Clinton campaign reach out to the Latino community.
"I'm going to be relying on him very heavily," Clinton said.

Tony Snow To Come Back To Work
CNN reports that White House Press Secretary Tony Snow plans to come back to work next week. Snow had taken a leave of absence in order to be treated for a cancerous growth that had spread to his liver. He will continue to receive chemotherapy treatments.

• A new NBC/WSJ poll finds that Americans are siding with Congress against the White House on Iraq. Some "55 percent believe that victory in Iraq isn't possible" — suggesting that majorities agree with Harry Reid that the war is "lost." What's more, the poll finds that "56 percent say they agree more with the Democrats in Congress who want to set a deadline for troop withdrawal."

• The White House is now on record saying they will veto a bill granting a voting House member to the District of Columbia. Whatever the constitutional ambiguity of this bill might be, this announcement nevertheless cements America's situation of denying the full benefits of democracy to its own capital city.

• The House Democratic leadership is working hard to lobby liberal members to vote for the Iraq supplemental conference report — the final version of the bill — even if they think it does not go far enough in getting the country out of Iraq.

• Only about 250 people showed up for John McCain's kickoff rally in Portsmouth today.

• The first New Hampshire debates have been scheduled for early June, hosted by CNN, The New Hampshire Union Leader, and WMUR-TV — but Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have yet to confirm that they'll attend.

• Mitt Romney has begun his national ad campaign, with spots running on the cable news channels. The ad buy is set to last several months.

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi skipped a Congressional briefing on Iraq by General David Petraeus, instead opting to speak with him at length over the phone for a half hour yesterday.

• New York's liberal Republican Mayor Mike Bloomberg just about ended speculation that he'd run for President — but he hopes that Al Gore does.

• Duncan Hunter upped the ante among Republicans denouncing Harry Reid's remark that the Iraq War is lost — by calling for Reid to resign as Senate Majority Leader.

So guess who doesn't agree with Rudy Giuliani's opinion that Americans would be more vulnerable under a Democratic President? The current protector of New York City -- Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The Politicker's Jason Horowitz reports that Bloomberg was asked at a press conference today for his response to Rudy's broadside. His reply:

"I don't see anything partisan about it whatsoever," he said. "I think you could have somebody of any party, any political persuasion or any nationality who understands that responsibility and that there are going to have to be very tough decisions."

The Politicker has more details.

We don't frequently do posts on partisan polls, but this one's interesting enough to merit a mention.

As you know, GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has been perhaps the leading GOP Congressional opponent of the Dems' Iraq plan, using all manner of procedural hocus-pocus to delay debate on Dem measures and otherwise prevent Congress from doing what the American people want it to do on Iraq.

So the DSCC commissioned a poll by the firm Anzalone Liszt Research of voters in Kentucky to see what McConnell's constituents think of all this.

Guess what: It turns out that Kentucky voters favor the Dem plan to end the war by a more than two-to-one margin, 64%-28%. How's that for responsiveness to constituents?

Again, it's a Dem poll, and at least one of the questions seemed loaded. But it's interesting stuff nonetheless. Check out all the poll's key numbers after the jump.

Read more »

The White House is now on record saying they will veto a bill granting a voting House member to the District of Columbia, Human Events reports. The bill, which has already passed the House but faces uncertain prospects in the Senate, would create two new seats, one for D.C. and the other a likely GOP seat in Utah. When asked about the bill, deputy press secretary Dana Perino said the President would veto it.

Opponents of the bill argue that it's unconstitutional to give a vote in the House to an area that is not part of a state. On the other hand, this means the United States will continue in its shameful status as a world power that denies the full benefits of democracy to its own capital.

Fun fact: Those against full representation have a point — the District has less people in it than the average House district. On the other hand, it has more people than Wyoming, which has a House member and two Republican Senators.

Here's the choice of TPM's panel of judges for the best moment of John McCain's action-packed Presidential announcement speech today:

"My friends, you can't sell me on hopelessness. You can't convince me our problems are insurmountable."

"Don't tell me what we can't do. Don't tell me we can't make our country stronger and the world safer. We can."

Who exactly is telling McCain all of these things? Talk about battling inner demons...

Seriously, this looks like a response to the fact that Rudy's grabbing the mantle of can-do optimism and leadership in the GOP primary -- which Rudy has accomplished largely by sidestepping overly close association with the Iraq War. McCain can't go out there and smack the podium a few times at a heavily-hyped announcement speech and -- poof! -- change the fact that the cause he's chained himself to is seen by substantial numbers of Americans as a lost one.

John Edwards releases a statement on Rudy saying that Dems, not Republicans, will keep America safer:

"Rudy Giuliani's suggestion that there is some superior 'Republican' way to fight terrorism is both divisive and plain wrong. He knows better. That's not the kind of leadership he offered in the days immediately after 9/11, and it's not the kind of leadership any American should be offering now.

"As far as the facts are concerned, the current Republican administration led us into a war in Iraq that has made us less safe and undermined the fight against al Qaeda. If that's the 'Republican' way to fight terror, Giuliani should know that the American people are looking for a better plan. That's just one more reason why this election is so important; we need to elect a Democratic president who will end the disastrous diversion of the war in Iraq."

Over on his blog, Kevin Drum faults Hillary and Obama for "whining" about how mean Rudy is being to Democrats, adding that they should take this occasion to explain why a Dem is needed to keep America safer. Edwards' statement, which is more partisan than those of his rivals, is at least a step in that direction.

Kevin's points are well taken, but he also writes that if Dems don't start doing this, "Rudy and the Republicans are going to win every round of this fight." I'd respond that this idea is itself unduly defensive. After all, Dems have been, and are, winning on the national security front -- for now, at least. Polls show that Americans agree with the Dems' argument about Iraq (that "victory" there isn't central to winning the "war on terror" and indeed that it's a diversion from it); some surveys are now showing more Americans trusting Dems in generic categories like "terrorism" and "foreign policy." What's more, Dems have been making substantive national security arguments, even if they weren't in the responses to Rudy.

Does this mean that Dems don't have lots of work to do on their foreign policy image or that there aren't foreign policy arenas that Dems had better be damn sure they're prepared to fight it out in en route to the White House? No, of course not. I'm just saying there's no reason to assume that Rudy's the clear winner here -- it's pretty obvious that he isn't -- or that more generally Republicans will rack up future victories on this front if Dems don't quickly revamp their approach in a big way. Things can always change, but the bottom line is that right now the GOP's not winning these arguments -- it's losing them.

Update: It's worth pointing out that Obama deserves much credit for going after Rudy first and getting this whole thing rolling. There's way too much tiptoeing around Rudy out there, and such timidity only serves to allow his 9/11 halo to keep on gleaming.

"How can the man who failed to prepare NYC for a second attack after the first one, quit the 9/11 commission because he was too busy raking in money from sketchy business deals, can't assess if the surge is working or if Iran and North Korea have nuclear weapons claim that he will keep America safe?"

-- DNC spokesperson Karen Finney, responding to Rudy's declaration that Americans will be safer under a Republican President.

As you know by now, Rudy Giuliani is now saying that Americans would be safer with a Republican President than with a Democratic one, suggesting that a Dem President could lead to another 9/11.

So we thought it would be a good idea to share with you these remarks from the very same Rudy Giuliani in September of 2006. He made these in response to the controversy over ABC's anti-Dem docudrama, The Path to 9/11:

"The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it," Giuliani said in response to a question after an appearance with fellow Republican Charlie Crist, who is running for governor. "I don't think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists -- the Islamic fanatics -- who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it."

That was back before Rudy was running in a Republican Primary, of course.

Kucinich Unveils Cheney Impeachment After All
Dennis Kucinich introduced his articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney yesterday, CNN reports, after all initially signalling he was postponing it in deference to the Vice President's medical treatments. The articles focus on Cheney's conduct of foreign policy. No other member of the House has signed on as a co-sponsor.

Rudy Has Heated Exchange On Civil Liberties With New Hampshire Questioner
The New York Times reports on a tough exchange Rudy Giuliani had at a town hall meeting in Henniker, New Hampshire. The questioner, who supported President Bush in 2000, objected vociferously to increases in the government's power to track and search citizens, saying they amounted to having "no rights." "That’s hardly no rights," Giuliani shot back. "You live in a country where you have more courts than anybody in the world. You live in a country that has more rights than any in the history of the world. You have more freedom than anyone, than anyone in this world has ever had. And no one is taking that away."

Obama: Boyhood In Muslim Country A Positive For Israel Negotiations
Barack Obama assured the crowd at the National Jewish Democratic Council that his boyhood spent in heavily Muslim Indonesia did not compromise his commitment to Israel's security, but is instead helpful to interacting with cultures around the world, the Associated Press reports. "That is a strength, and it allows me to say things to them that other presidents might not be able to say," Obama said. "And that's part of what's promising, I think, about this presidency."

Edwards Campaign Distributing CD — Including A Song By A Hillary Supporter
The Associated Press notes that the John Edwards campaign is offering advance copies of "Moneyland," a CD compilation of songs about the plight of rural America, in exchange for a $50 contribution. One of the songs is sung by country legend Merle Haggard, who has already penned a song promoting Hillary Clinton. Edwards spokesman David "Mudcat" Saunders said the album and the overall thrust of the promotion are about rural America as an issue, and Haggard has been a major voice in those issues. "If he's for Hillary, he's got the right to be with who he wants to be with," said Saunders.

McCain Kicking Off New Hampshire Campaign In Liberal Bastion
John McCain is launching his campaign tour today with an appearance in Portsmouth, New Hampshire — a liberal area that makes for a potentially odd choice for a conservative basing his campaign around a defense of the Iraq War. The town's paper, the Portsmouth Herald, is greeting the Senator with a critical editorial: "For a student of history, McCain has forgotten that earlier American efforts at such security stability failed — and have since the Vietnam War when the publicly hailed strategic hamlet and pacification programs proved to be successful short-term fixes that had little impact on the outcome."

Black Caucus Members Push To Cancel Fox Debate
The Hill reports that many members of the Congressional Black Caucus are pushing for the independent CBC Institute to formally cancel plans for a Democratic Presidential debate hosted by Fox News. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have already signalled that they will not attend. "My point is that the major candidates aren’t going to be there, and that’s no real debate," said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY). Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA) was even more blunt: "We’re very serious about taking the administration in November and I wouldn’t trust getting an accurate and true portrayal of our views on the issues if Fox News is coordinating it."

Poll: McCain Ahead In Arizona — Barely
A new Arizona State University poll finds John McCain with a bare lead of 32% to Rudy Giuliani's 27% in McCain's home state. The pollster attributes McCain's dip in support to a possible entry by Fred Thompson, as well as an improved showing by Mitt Romney among conservatives.

Supreme Court Hearing McCain-Feingold Challenge Today
The Washington Post outlines the potential impact of the Supreme Court's deliberations on a case they are hearing today, on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold law's limits on third-party issue ads in the run-up to an election. The Post notes that the case "will also shed light on the new court led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts and its inclination to abide by previous rulings -- in this case, the constitutionality of McCain-Feingold was upheld 5 to 4."

States Considering Robocall Limits
In the wake of the 2006 election cycle's heavy usage of campaign robocalls, including fraudulent calls designed to sabotage the other side, The New York Times reports that many states are considering heavy limits on automated calls. "The public really doesn’t like these things anymore, especially with the increasing frequency and negativity," said Missouri's Democratic Attorney General, Jay Nixon.

Fred Thompson Gets Daily Internet Radio Show
"The Fred Thomspon Report" will be featured on ABCRadio.com. Radio Ink reports that the show will feature Thompson's "opinions and commentary." Says John McConnell, Senior Vice President of Programming as ABCRadio.com, "There is a clear demand to hear from Senator Thompson ... the 'Fred Thompson Report' is another extension to deliver his respected opinion." — Kate Redburn

Barack Obama has just unleashed a hard-hitting statement hammering Rudy for his assertion yesterday that Americans would be safer under a Republican President:

“Rudy Giuliani today has taken the politics of fear to a new low and I believe Americans are ready to reject those kind of politics. America’s mayor should know that when it comes to 9/11 and fighting terrorists, America is united. We know we can win this war based on shared purpose, not the same divisive politics that question your patriotism if you dare to question failed policies that have made us less secure. I think we should focus on strengthening our intelligence, working with local authorities and doing all the things we haven't yet done to keep Americans safe. The threat we face is real, and deserves better than to be the punchline of another political attack.”

That's pretty good -- really, it sounds like an adult speaking to a child. It's about time someone knocked that 9/11 halo off Rudy's head. Let's hope we hear much more of this.

Update: Hillary has now just blasted out this statement:

"There are people right now in the world, not just wishing us harm but actively planning and plotting to cause us harm. If the last six years of the Bush Administration have taught us anything, it's that political rhetoric won't do anything to quell those threats. And that America is ready for a change.

"One of the great tragedies of this Administration is that the President failed to keep this country unified after 9/11. We have to protect our country from terrorism – it shouldn't be a Democratic fight or a Republican fight. The plain truth is that this Administration has done too little to protect our ports, make our mass transit safer, and protect our cities. They have isolated us in the world and have let Al Qaeda regroup. The next President is going to be left with these problems and will have to do what it takes to make us safer and bring Democrats and Republicans together around this common mission of protecting our nation. That is exactly what has to be done and what I am ready to do."

No mention of the word "Rudy."

Late last night we brought you advance excerpts of the speech Rahm Emanuel will deliver later this morning at the Brookings Institution. We now have obtained an advance copy of the full speech -- it's a broad indictment of the Bush administration that argues that all-pervasive partisanship, not incompetence, is the common thread linking all of the administration's manifold failings. Take a look. It's after the jump.

Read more »