A new SurveyUSA poll in Missouri finds John Edwards to be the most electable of the top three Democrats in the key swing state of Missouri. In addition, the top three Democrats all generally fare well against three Republicans, with only one GOP win in the nine match-ups:

Giuliani (R) 48%, Clinton (D) 45%
Clinton (D) 48%, Thompson (R) 45%
Clinton (D) 51%, Romney (R) 40%
Obama (D) 46%, Giuliani (R) 44%
Obama (D) 48%, Thompson (R) 45%
Obama (D) 51%, Romney (R) 40%
Edwards (D) 47%, Giuliani (R) 42%
Edwards (D) 50%, Thompson (R) 40%
Edwards (D) 56%, Romney (R) 32%

The AFL-CIO executive board has approved a budget of $53 million for voter education and get-out-the-vote efforts in the 2008 election, certain to be used in the aid of the Democratic nominee for president.

Controlling for inflation, the amount is slightly less than the $50 million spent in 2004 — but this is still impressive given that in 2005 several major unions, including the Teamsters and SEIU, quit the AFL-CIO and thus caused a severe budget crunch for the federation.

Governor Ernie Fletcher (R-KY) is probably not a big fan of former Congresswoman Ann Northup (R) right now. A liberal group, the Bluegrass Freedom Fund, is now running an ad featuring footage from Northup's stump speech and one of her TV ads from her unsuccessful primary challenge against the scandal-plagued governor:

So even after Fletcher won the primary, and no longer has to deal with Northup's campaign directly, the subject is still coming up.

GOP House leader John Boehner -- last seen saying that the loss of American lives in Iraq is a "small price" to pay for realizing Bush's vision in Iraq -- is upset with the "mismanagement" of the NRCC and is locked in a struggle for control over it with NRCC chief Tom Cole, according to a new report.

The Politico's John Bresnahan and Patrick O'Connor have the story. It's a good yarn, complete with shouting matches and hissy fits. The story is a reminder of just how bleak the 2008 electoral landscape looks for the GOP -- and the depth of denial about this that's reigning at the NRCC right now:

Inside-the-Beltway Republicans have grown frustrated with the NRCC for its unrealistically rosy assessments of an ever-eroding landscape for congressional Republicans.

Lawmakers are frustrated with Cole and his top aides for casting their net too wide by targeting Democratic-controlled seats that Republicans have little chance of picking up next year.

Some also gripe that Cole fails to manage expectations on the Hill when he refuses to acknowledge that the GOP’s chances for regaining the majority fade with every retirement or negative news story about President Bush or other scandal-plagued Republican lawmaker.

The whole thing is worth a read.

It looks like the Giuliani campaign isn't willing to explain what he meant when he told the NRA today that the MoveOn ad "passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass."

Ryan Sager of The Sun, asking what on earth Rudy meant by the comment, has now received this response of sorts from the Rudy camp:

Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella responds: "The Mayor was referring to the fact that Democrats stood silent on an ad that crossed the line in disparaging an American hero."

Right, right, Democrats are bad. We know the Mayor thinks this. But what did the Mayor mean when he said we "should not allow" political organizations to do what MoveOn did? Does he support legal curbs on criticism of military figures or on such political speech in general? Or does he oppose any and all such restrictions?

That's the question. And it remains unanswered.

A bunch of people have been asking today whether John Edwards would have voted against the resolution condemning MoveOn if he'd still be in the Senate.

Well, here's the answer: He would have voted No.

The Edwards campaign has just sent me the following statement from Edwards himself:

"I respect and honor General Petraeus' service, but I would have opposed the Cornyn amendment as an irresponsible waste of time -- the Senate should be working on ending the war, not dithering over newspaper ads."

So there you have it.

It looks like Congressman Jerry Weller (R-IL) — the son-in-law of a former Central American dictator — is going out in style.

After Weller's retirement announcement today, CBS Chicago political editor Mike Flannery and a camera crew followed Weller and asked him about a suspicious land deal in Nicaragua that some believe may have led to Weller's sudden retirement. Weller's aides, who surrounded him as a sort of security squad, got messy:

"There's a large man, who begins shoving reporters around, including yours truly. He shoves me one way, then he goes after another reporter with CLTV ... There's an opening in the doorway, and I begin moving through that doorway, and he shoves me down the stairs; he shoves me into a railing on the staircase and also into a woman in on the staircase who was traveling with Weller," Flannery said.

Weller then began yelling at the reporters on camera, threatening to call the police against them for having pushed the woman.

Flannery says he plans to press charges against the Congressman's staffer.

Congressman Tom Davis (R-VA) hasn't even yet announced his widely-expected Senate candidacy, but Democrats are already gearing up to run for his seat. Former Congresswoman Leslie Byrne has notified liberal Virginia bloggers that she's formed an exploratory committee to make her comeback.

Byrne was elected to a single term in 1992, but was then defeated by Davis in the 1994 Republican landslide. In 2005, she was the unsuccessful Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor, and afterward became an early supporter of Jim Webb's Senate campaign.

If Davis vacates the seat for a Senate campaign, the seat could be an easy pick-up for Democrats. In the 2006 Senate election, Jim Webb carried the district by a ten-point margin.

A new SurveyUSA poll of Ohio shows John Edwards as the strongest Democrat in the key swing state, well ahead of Hillary Clinton's performance:

Giuliani (R) 48%, Clinton (D) 47%
Clinton (D) 48%, Thompson (R) 47%
Clinton (D) 52%, Romney (R) 42%
Giuliani (R) 52%, Obama (D) 39%
Thompson (R) 50%, Obama (D) 42%
Romney (R) 46%, Obama (D) 45%
Giuliani (R) 48%, Edwards (D) 47%
Edwards (D) 52%, Thompson (R) 43%
Edwards (D) 56%, Romney (R) 36%

Edwards' focus on class issues appears to play well here, while Obama's more cerebral approach doesn't look like it's hitting a nerve. Hillary Clinton could well win Ohio herself, but based on these numbers it would be a tight race.

While delivering his big speech today before the National Rifle Association, Rudy was interrupted by a cell phone call from his wife, Judith Nathan. An apparently surprised Rudy told the crowd, "it's my wife," spoke to her for a moment, and closed the call with a touching, I'm-happily-married moment, saying, "I love you" to her in front of a crowd of gun rights types.

Is it possible that the man forgot to turn off his cell -- or at least stick the thing on vibrate -- while giving a major speech that could be critical to the outcome of his candidacy? Or is it possible that Judi didn't know about the speech?

On the other hand, it turns out that this isn't the first time this has happened to Rudy, whose past failed marriages could turn out to be a liability among conservative voters. A rival campaign has sent us some video of Rudy receiving a very similar "surprise" call from Judy at the podium during an event last June. And he did the "I love you" thing then, too.

Take a look:

Congressman Jerry Weller (R-IL) will announce today that he is not seeking re-election, setting up a potentially close race for his swing seat — President Bush carried the district with 53% in 2004, and Weller won re-election with only 55% in 2006, despite not being targeted.

"I need to give my family the time needed to be a full-time father and husband," Weller will say, according to prepared remarks.

And on the subject of his family: Weller is married to Zury Ríos Montt, a member of the Guatemalan Congress from the Guatemalan Republican Front — a party founded by her father, Efraín Ríos Montt. The elder Ríos Montt is a former right-wing dictator who took power in a March 1982 military coup, combatted leftist guerrillas by employing brutal tactics against indigenous peoples — killing tens of thousands — and was himself forced from power in August 1983.

Standing in front of a Middle School in Des Moines today, John Edwards laid out an ambitious education agenda that includes everything from universal preschool to a massive overhaul of No Child Left Behind. Details after the jump.

Read more »

National Dems think they have a major pickup opportunity in New Jersey, now that Dem State Senator John Adler has announced that he will challenge GOP Rep. Jim Saxton.

Saxton's district is precisely the type of district that national Dems think is particularly fertile ground this year: suburban and inclined to vote Dem in national elections. While Bush won the district by under 3% in 2004, Al Gore carried the district by a wide 10% margin in 2000, and next year's Dem Presidential nominee will almost certainly improve on John Kerry's mediocre performance there.

What's more, Adler starts the campaign with $194,000 available in his coffers -- money left over from a Senatorial campaign committee that he opened in 2003 in the event of a retirement from Senator Frank Lautenberg. And it won't be his first time challenging the 13-term Saxton. His first attempt, in 1990 at age 31, before he became a state senator, fell short by 19 points, but he knows the district and has stumped there in the past. For all these reasons, Dems are bullish on their chances of picking up the seat.

So New School President Bob Kerrey may not run for retiring Senator Chuck Hagel's seat, after all, according to several people close to him.

If he does nix a run it'll be a blow to national Dems who've been hoping that he'd go for it, since he has a very good shot at capturing the seat for Democrats, having been a Senator in the state in the past. Apparently he was set to make an announcement today but now may delay sharing word on his plans until next week.

Here's another intriguing quote from Rudy's speech before the NRA today, this one addressing the MoveOn ad criticizing General Petraeus:

"Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or you don't; whether you agree with the surge or you don't; Democrats even came back from Iraq and said that he's having more success than anybody had thought.

"So to attack the man's integrity, and honesty, and decency, is in my view indecent. It passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass."

"We should not allow" -- that's very suggestive. Does Rudy favor legal measures prohibiting criticism of military leaders? Does he favor legal curbs on ad hominem political speech in general? It's a question that one might put directly to the Giuliani campaign.

More soon.

Rudy, speaking before the National Rifle Association today, offered a creative explanation for why his views have changed from ardent support for gun control as Mayor of New York to strong support for the Second Amendment as a GOP Presidential candidate.

His reason? September 11th has persuaded him that gun rights are necessary. He said:

"I also think that there have been subsequent intervening events — September 11 — which cast somewhat of a different light on the Second Amendment and Second Amendment rights. It doesn't change the fundamental rights, but maybe it highlights the necessity for them more."

More soon, including video.

Late Update: Here it is:

Rudy has now responded to the ruckus over the claim yesterday by one of his advisers, GOP Rep. Pete King, that there are "too many mosques" in America.

King yesterday clarified by saying that he'd meant that there are "too many mosques" where radical Islam is practiced. Now Rudy has weighed in in his defense, arguing that King didn't say what he actually said, and anyone who says otherwise is "seeking to misinterpret" his remarks:

“Peter explained it quite adequately ,” Giuliani said at the news conference in Reston, Virginia after returning from London. “For me, he didn’t have to explain it. I understood exactly what he meant. I’m glad he explained it for everyone that might seek to misinterpret."

Here's what King said:

“Unfortunately we have too many mosques in this country, there's too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam."

Rudy -- an ardent pro-gun control advocate who launched a huge lawsuit against the gun industry as Mayor of New York -- is now speaking before the NRA's big convention in D.C., trying to sell himself as a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment.

The big challenge Rudy faces is whether he can successfully frame his embrace of gun control as being purely anti-crime. We'll bring you highlights soon.

Obama's statement on the failure of the Levin-Reed withdrawal bill in the Senate this morning:

“It is a sad day for America when the United States Senate once again fails to vote to bring this war to a responsible end. The Levin –Reed amendment offers a responsible course to bring our troops out of Iraq, with a hard date to begin our drawdown and a hard date to complete it. I will continue to press my colleagues to turn the page on a war that should never have been fought. I will continue to insist that George Bush be denied the blank check he needs to continue this war. We also need to turn the page on a politics that puts divisive distractions ahead of the interests of the American people. It’s time to leave behind the political posturing so that we can come together as Americans to end this war.”

Dodd has also weighed in just now, denouncing the bill itself as not going far enough to enforce withdrawal by tying it directly to funding. His full statement after the jump.

Read more »

Yet another effort to pull out of Iraq has died in the Senate. The chamber just voted on the Levin-Reed Amendment, which would require a withdrawal from Iraq to begin in 90 days and end in nine months. It failed 47-47 — far, far short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a threatened Republican filibuster.

The last time the Senate voted on Levin-Reed, it was blocked with 52 in favor to 47 against. Proponents of our continued presence in Iraq have held solidly together, with the same number of votes this time as they had last time.

Update: Just to clarify, this was not a toothless, non-binding "pretty please" measure. It was quite clear. From the text:

Deadline for Commencement of Reduction. — The Secretary of Defense shall commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Barack Obama shows a very personal side in his latest ad, entitled "Mother," running in Iowa:

"My mother died of cancer at 53. In those last painful months, she was more worried about paying her medical bills than getting well," he says. "I hear stories like hers everyday. For 20 years, Washington's talked about healthcare reform, and reformed nothing ... Unless we stop the bickering and the lobbyists, we'll be in the same place 20 years from now."

Chris Dodd has a tough critique of Hillary Clinton's recent health care rollout: She bungled the issue last time.

"It should be far more than just a parable of personal growth and maturation. This was about an issue that was critically important to the county," Dodd said of Hillary's 1993 health care effort. "It was a major effort that failed. There were a lot of reasons that it failed, not the least of which it was mismanaged terribly at the time."

And as for Hillary's talk about how she's fought on the issue and has the metaphorical scars from the battle, Dodd doesn't give her that, either: "Not everyone succeeds in everything they try to do. But if you're going to highlight experiences, they ought to reflect the ability to produce results rather than what you tried and failed at."

John McCain will blast Rudy Giuliani before the National Rifle Association today, taking on Rudy for the lawsuit that he helped file with New York City "to bankrupt our great gun manufacturers."

"My friends, gun owners are not extremists; you are the core of modern America," McCain will say according to the prepared remarks. "The Second Amendment is unique in the world and at the core of our constitutional freedoms. It guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. To argue anything else is to reject the clear meaning of our founding fathers."

Late Update: McCain's speech is actually today, not yesterday.

New numbers from the Public Policy Institute of California show that Hillary enjoys a much more substantial lead over her Dem rivals in that state than Rudy does in the GOP primary field:

Clinton 41%

Obama 23%

Edwards 14%

Meanwhile, among Republicans:

Giuliani 22%

Romney 16%

McCain 15%

Remember, one key to Rudy's primary strategy is to compensate for being out of step ideologically with southern and conservative voters by racking up victories in big coastal states like California, New York and Florida. Yet he's only clinging to a modest lead in California.

Here's another fun detail from Vicente Fox's upcoming autobiography: He says that despite President Bush's cowboy image, the man is actually scared of horses.

Fox tells the story of the two men meeting in Mexico in early 2001, in which he invited Bush to ride a large horse. Bush nervously backed away. "A horse lover can always tell when others don't share our passion," Fox wrote.

Fun fact: Bush's Crawford ranch, purchased in 1999 in order to help create a down-home image for his presidential campaign, does not have any horses.

Here's another current issue Fred Thompson doesn't know about. On his way to a fundraiser in San Antonio, the candidate was asked about the Jena Six. "I don't know anything about it," he said.

Sam Brownback has introduced a bill guaranteed to go nowhere fast — but also guaranteed to score points with the social conservatives. His Ultrasound Informed Consent Act would require women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound first.

His Senate office's press release says: "The requirements of the Ultrasound Informed Consent Act are placed solely on the doctor, not the patient. A woman seeking an abortion may refuse to view the images of the ultrasound after the results are made available to her." However, it's worth noting that the woman would still be required to submit to the ultrasound, whether she looked at the screen or not.

"I am hopeful that this bill will inform women and will cause a deeper reflection on the humanity of unborn children," Brownback said in the statement. "It is important to promote a culture that values life in all stages."

In an interview with CNN, Mike Huckabee expressed skepticism when asked about whether he would direct federal money to groups that provide condoms in Africa.

"I've been a little reluctant to think that condoms alone are the most effective way. It certainly is more effective than not having them. But I think helping people understand that condoms do have a failure rate, and they are not totally 100 percent successful," Huckabee said. "And it gives some people a false sense of security thinking that they can still live dangerously and recklessly and that that's going to be a fail safe protection when it obviously is not."

Well this should be a fun Republican event. The Iowa Republican Party's annual Reagan Day Dinner on September 27 will feature an interesting lineup of speakers: Hunter, Thompson.

That's right. Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson will be there.

Who else did you think I was talking about?

"That 60-vote barrier is the gate around the President’s desk."

-- Nancy Pelosi, in a rare foray into criticism of Senate rules, arguing that the primary function of the GOP filibusters is to protect the President from having to veto Iraq withdrawal measures that are popular with the public. It certainly is working out that way, isn't it.

The controversy surrounding House Minority Leader John Boehner's statement that U.S. deaths in Iraq are a "small price" is spreading, and soon it'll be shown some more on TV. The anti-war group Americans United For Change is now running an ad in the districts of vulnerable Republicans throughout the country, publicizing Boehner's remark. The ad then asks viewers to call their congressmen and urge them to condemn what Boehner said.

In an interview New York 1, Tom Vilsack went to a place that has previously been a no go — attacking Rudy Giuliani's personal life:

"I can't even get into the number of marriages and the fact that his children — the relationship he has with his children — and what kind of circumstance New York was in before September the 11th and whether or not he could have even been re-elected as mayor prior to September the 11th. I mean, there are lots of issues involving Mayor Giuliani, and I'm sure if he becomes the nominee we'll be able to see those."

Somebody had to be first to do it, so it may as well be somebody who's not running for president anymore. But there is one lingering question: Is it a good idea for a Hillary surrogate to go into somebody's else's marital life?

Obama's got a new statement out explaining why he didn't stay in the Senate to vote on the resolution condemning MoveOn: He claims that by skipping the vote, rather than voting against it, he was registering his protest against the vote's triviality. Obama's statement:

"The focus of the United States Senate should be on ending this war, not on criticizing newspaper advertisements. This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq. It's precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics. I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared.

"All of us respect the service of General Petraeus and all of our brave men and women in uniform. The way to honor that service is to give them a mission that is responsible, not to vote on amendments like the Cornyn amendment while we continue to pursue the wrong policy in Iraq."

It remains to be seen, to put it charitably, whether this will satisfy the people who are ticked off about the missed vote.

Elizabeth Edwards is now wading into the fight between her husband and Hillary Clinton, echoing an earlier comment by John Edwards accusing Hillary of ripping off his healthcare plan.

"I call it John Edwards' health care plan as delivered by Hillary Clinton," Mrs. Edwards told CNN. "The truth is that anyone who tries to describe Hillary's health care plan will run through every material part of John's health care plan."

She also echoed another theme of her husband's campaign, blasting Hillary for granting special access to donors.

"You can have a meeting with a member of Congress if you donate to Hillary's campaign," she said. "What this is saying is she's willing to sell special access to the government if you just have the check. Isn't that just exactly what John is saying we shouldn't be doing?"

MoveOn chief Eli Pariser hammers back at today's Senate vote condemning his group with this statement:

"No wonder public approval of Congress is tanking. They’re so out of touch with reality that they can find time to condemn an ad but they can't do what most Americans want -- vote to end this war."

Hard to argue with, really. What we're really hoping to see soon is some polling on the question of the importance the American public accords the Ad Heard Round The World.

Congressman Peter King (R-NY), who serves as an advisor to Rudy Giuliani's campaign, is being put on the hot-seat for his statement, "Unfortunately we have too many mosques in this country, there's too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam."

King now claims that his remarks were taken out of context, and that he was simply referring to there being too many mosques whose leaders are sympathetic to radical Islam. Now if that's true, then it would much easier to defend. On the other hand, he might have genuinely meant that there are too many Muslims in this country, and he's not backtracking from a rather impolitic statement.

So what do you think? Was he really just stumbling over his words? Here's a video of his interview with The Politico:

"It is a sad day in the Senate when we spend hours debating an ad while our young people are dying in Iraq. Now that the Senate has twice voted on this ad, it is time to move on and vote to end the war."

-- Chris Dodd, in a statement on the Senate's votes today on whether to condemn MoveOn (Via Atrios).

Now this is curious. In the latest Gallup poll, more Republicans approve of the job Congress is doing than there are Democrats who approve. According to the poll, 37% of Republicans approve of Congress' performance, compared to 23% of Democrats and 14% of independents, with an overall rating of 24% approval and 71% disapproval.

This is odd, of course, considering that both houses have Democratic majorities. But on second thought, the current Congress has passed President Bush's funding requests for Iraq, passed his FISA bill, and has given the White House exactly what it wanted on a host of other issues. So what do Republicans really have to complain about?

A new poll from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling finds that Senator Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) just might be vulnerable next year. In a match-up with Democratic state Rep. Grier Martin, Dole leads 45%-30% — putting her under 50% against an opponent who doesn't have high name recognition. Martin has not announced a candidacy against Dole, but has been openly considering a run.

After biographical data about Martin was given to respondents, Martin took the lead by a 47%-40% margin. Now there is a caveat here. The pollster only gave positive information about Martin, without any positive info about Dole to balance it out. And you can bet the Dole campaign will be more than happy to put out their own information promoting Dole, along with attacks against Martin.

The full polling question on Martin is available after the jump.

Read more »

Barack Obama missed the politically dicey vote today on whether to condemn MoveOn for its ad blasting General Petraeus, according to the vote's roll call.

At the same time, however, Obama was indeed present for the vote this morning that came just moments before the MoveOn one. He voted for the Boxer measure condemning the attack on Petraeus and all other members of the military.

The vote he missed on MoveOn, of course, was the far more difficult one politically -- voting for it could make life complicated in the Dem primary by alienating the powerful group and its supporters, while voting against it could conceivably be used against him in a general election. Meanwhile, the vote for the Boxer measure is explainable, since it's a condemnation of all political attacks on military figures. Of course, there could perfectly well be a genuine scheduling explanation, too.

As Ben Smith notes, Hillary and Chris Dodd both voted against the anti-MoveOn reso -- Hillary doing so even though she's under assault from Rudy for not condemning the group.

Late Update: First Read reports that late last night Obama cancelled an event in South Carolina today. An Obama spokesperson said that the cancellation was necessary so Obama could be in the Senate for today's votes.

GOP House leader John Boehner has finally responded for the first time to all the criticism of his assertion that troop losses in Iraq are a "small price" to pay for defeating Al Qaeda.

Not surprisingly, he chose to do this in an interview with Fox News. The results were interesting. Take a look.

If the Hillary camp were hoping for the Norman Hsu publicity to die down, they're out of luck. Prosecutors plan to unseal a criminal complaint against him alleging not only fraud related a $60 million Ponzi scheme, but also campaign finance violations.

Hillary's campaign has already started the process of returning $850,000 in bundled donations received through Hsu over the years, but this can't be good publicity to have received large sums of money in the first place from a man who is now accused of breaking campaign laws.

The GOP-introduced resolution condemning MoveOn just passed by a huge margin, 72-25. Roughly half the Democrats in the Senate supported it.

A couple of the more interesting votes: Jim Webb, who just yesterday was a Netroots hero, voted for it, even though the last thing he needs as a military guy is cover on something like this.

Meanwhile, Hillary -- who's been under assault by Rudy for refusing to condemn MoveOn but who's also locked in a tough Dem primary -- stood her ground and voted No.

We'll have a list of Dems who backed this thing and Dems who voted against it in a bit. Stay tuned.

Late Update: A full list of all the Dem Senators who voted to condemn MoveOn is after the jump.

Later Update: More developments. Barack Obama missed today's vote on MoveOn -- even though he'd been present in the Senate earlier to vote on the Boxer measure.

And Chris Dodd, who voted against the condemnation, just released this searing statement criticizing the Senate for wasting its time on this:

"It is a sad day in the Senate when we spend hours debating an ad while our young people are dying in Iraq. Now that the Senate has twice voted on this ad, it is time to move on and vote to end the war."

Later Update: MoveOn chief Eli Pariser hits back at the Senate with this:

"No wonder public approval of Congress is tanking. They’re so out of touch with reality that they can find time to condemn an ad but they can't do what most Americans want -- vote to end this war."

Full list of Dems who backed the resolution after the jump.

Read more »

Barbara Boxer's resolution -- which condemned all political attacks questioning the integrity and patriotism of military figures, such as the ones against Max Cleland and John Kerry, and not just MoveOn's criticism of General Petraeus -- has just gone down to defeat. The vote was 51-46 -- far short of the magic number of 60.

Virtually all the GOP Senators refused to support this measure condemning all political attacks on military figures. A full list of them after the jump.

Read more »

Harry Reid's office has just told me that he and Dem Senator Carl Levin will be voting against the GOP resolution to condemn MoveOn that's being debated as we speak.

His office says, however, that he and Levin will vote for the reso being introduced by Barbara Boxer, -- which we reported on below -- that condemns all political attacks on military men and women, including Max Cleland and John Kerry, as well as on Scholar Warrior Petraeus.

Thus is revealed the point behind the Boxer move: Reid and Levin, by voting for Boxer's reso, insulate themselves from charges that they won't condemn MoveOn for attacking the General -- while simultaneously forcing Republicans to decide whether or not to condemn such attacks that came from their own party.

Of course, it doesn't bode well for MoveOn, obviously, since Boxer's reso condemns the group, too.

Looks like there's going to be another contentious vote in the Senate today. Harry Reid's office tells me that there's going to be a vote today on a GOP-introduced resolution on whether to condemn MoveOn for running its ad criticizing Scholar-Warrior Petraeus.

But there's an interesting twist to this. I'm told that Senator Barbara Boxer is set to introduce a separate counter resolution, which hasn't yet been made public, that would call for condemation of all political attacks on the "honor, integrity, and patriotism" of men and women in the military. Boxer's reso specifically mentions GOP attacks on both Max Cleland in 2002 and John Kerry in 2004, in addition to the MoveOn ad against Petraeus.

What this means is that Republicans who want to condemn MoveOn will also now be asked to condemn the Republican National Committee and other GOPers' attacks on both Cleland and Kerry. It will be interesting to see how Republican Senators handle this one.

I've obtained a copy of Boxer's resolution; its full text is after the jump.

Late Update: Senate debate on this is underway.

Read more »