11/14: Are Huck And John Rudy's Best Friends?

We agree that the big story out of IA this week is Mike Huckabee's surge in recent polling. We still don't think he will win, but that does not even matter. As long as he finishes anywhere close to Mitt Romney, he will be THE story on the GOP side of the ticket until the next contest is held. Considering that a Hillary Clinton IA blow-out is unlikely, Romney will be, at best, headline number three. Romney faces a similar challenge in NH, where John McCain is surging. A strong second place showing makes McCain (always an MSM favorite) the feel good story out of NH leaving Romney some delegates but no real buzz heading into SC. We liked's Romney's early state strategy months ago, but as we get closer to game time it appears that the best laid plans of mice and men...

DEM FIELD: The MSM Wanted A Race, And They Got One

Some of those who declared Barack Obama DOA following the anti-gay gospel singer Donnie McClurkin incident are now backing off those claims in light of the damage recent attacks from Dem WH '08ers, the GOP, and the MSM have inflicted on HRC's poll numbers. Open Left's Matt Stoller looks at CBS numbers showing weakening support, higher unfavs, and low IA caucus second choice numbers and comments: "Clinton is a well-liked figure in the Democratic Party, so the fact that her unfavorables are much higher than Obama and Edwards could simply mean that the press has focused aggressively on her failures as a candidate, and that she's been attacked by both Obama and Edwards. Her unfavorables are going up, her supporters are getting nervous, and other candidates' supporters don't want to back her. In other words, the negative attacks are working."

Looking at similar numbers, Open Left's Chris Bowers blogs: "I boldly proclaimed that Barack Obama had already lost the 2008 presidential primaries because I believed he had lost the primarily non-Christian, progressive creative class vote that had served as his base early in the campaign. ... I still don't think it is possible for him to win without that vote. However, at the time I thought he had basically lost that vote with a series of events that culminated, but did not start, with the gay-bashing McClurkin event in South Carolina. Now, it seems to me that maybe he just pissed them off with that event, but he didn't lose them for good. ... the progressive creative class has decided that it still prefers Obama to Clinton no matter what Obama may or may not have done wrong so far."

Stoller later follows up: "I'm becoming increasingly skeptical that there is any grand coalition building going on here, or that the progressive movement or the creative class is at all relevant to this election at this point. It looks to me like the press is picking our nominee, as usual. Obama could have sown up a grand coalition, he did not, so now it's all about the media."

More Stoller: "What is very clear is that if you are pleased with the shape of the race of the last two weeks, you should be careful and temper your joy. The press is a wild, unpredictable, vicious, and easily bored group of gossips who do not like progressives, Democrats, labor, or any of us. And despite what you may or may not think, they do not like your candidate. Since Obama and Edwards have faced little negative attention over the past few months, there's a lot to work with."

CLINTON: 'Brilliant' 'Bush-esque' 'Retail Campaigning

The netroots are largely laying off attacking Hillary Clinton over the planted question story. Open Left's Chris Bowers does allow: "This is bad. This is a real scandal. This is Bush-esque. Seven years ago, I probably wouldn't have believed a student making allegations like this, but I now I do. And this statement of plausible deniability from a Clinton staffer on the incident doesn't inspire me with a lot of confidence."

However, there is also a fair number of HRC defenders out there including ex-Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) outer Lane Hudson at The Huffington Post: "The recent media intrigue over allegations of 'question planting' in the audience of Hillary Clinton rallies and town hall meetings is ridiculous and lacks insight. ... Anyone who has seen Hillary in action knows that she is, quite possibly, the smartest, hardest working candidate in history. ... The Clinton campaigns have always been known for their mastery of the press and spinning issues. What is happening here is that they have taken the talking points to the audience. If you ask me, it's quite brilliant."

More HRC defending from Seacoast Progressive Alliance's Chaz Proulx: "I seldom criticize a fellow Democrat publicly, but John Edwards' recent attacks against Hillary Clinton have gone way over the line. In particular I'm talking about his response to the 'question planting' incident in Iowa. ... Retail campaigning is nuts. That's why it's so much fun, and that's why you won't see a top tier candidate capitalize on opponents' staffers' mistakes very often in a primary. There is an unwritten code for good reason -- it can happen to anybody. Blowing an isolated incident out of proportion is disingenuous by default. ... John Edwards has not only ignored the code."

EDWARDS: Why Stop With Their Health Care?

After clearing up some early constitutional issues, the netroots lined up in support of John Edwards' new IA ad promising to "take away" the health care of Congress and his cabinet:

• Ezra Klein: "The Edwards Campaign says that it will take the form of a bill sent to Congress, which seems constitutional, though everyone says it would be impossible to pass. But would it be? That's the part I don't understand. Why wouldn't the Democratic leadership want to use this legislation to hammer away at Republicans? ... Meanwhile, I find the liberal outrage and bewilderment over this bit of populist symbolism to be very unsettling. At base, Edwards is doing something very simple: Dramatizing the inequities in our health care system."
• Crooks and LiarsNicole Belle: "Wow. That's a statement I can get behind."
• Open Left's Matt Stoller: "I like this ad, as it creates a real sense of conflict with the powers in DC. Edwards makes the argument that if 50 million people don't have health care insurance, then Congress shouldn't either. Rhetorically, it's a continuation of his Two America's theme, and it's quite populist. In the last five polls about priorities, health care is a close number two or three to Iraq and the economy among voters."
• MyDD's David Mizner: "Voters in Iowa and elsewhere will gobble it up. That's one thing that impresses me about that Edwards campaign: he's seeking to the win the support of primary voters, not the Establishment. The same can not always be said of Obama, whose talk of a social security crisis seemed designed to please pundits."
• Matthew Yglesias: "It's all good rhetoric, I'll give them that."

EDWARDS II: George Plays Gotcha Too!

IA Independent's Douglas Burns reports that Edwards told the western Iowa Spanish-language newspaper La Prensa on drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants: "I haven't changed my mind. ... I've always thought that we want anyone driving on the road in the United States to have the training, the education, the licensing." Burns goes back and looks at what Edwards told ABC's This Week and comments: "If Not Outright Switch Edwards' Licensing Position Spectacularly Nuanced."

OBAMA: So Close Yet So Far

If Barack Obama wanted to he could close the deal with many in the netroots by coming out against residual forces in Iraq and leading the fight against more Iraq supplemental funding in Congress. Open Left's Chris Bowers blogs: "If I were to endorse someone who overtly favored residual forces at this point, it would invalidate most of the work I have done in the primaries so far ... I also have serious problems with what I perceive to be Obama's insider elitism. However, I can't ignore that one of he two leading candidates for the Democratic nomination is potentially the best identity vessel for my ideal progressive coalition to come around in the history of American politics, bar none."

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat writes: "Now that Senator Barack Obama has regained his footing in the Presidential race, it is time for him to go for the win - by demonstrating leadership on the issues NOW! Certainly, but it will take more than pointing to the 2002 AUMF vote. It will take leadership NOW. Strong leadership from the Senate. Strong leadership that insists the Congress not fund the war without timetables for withdrawal."

OBAMA II: Wake Up Call

Michelle Obama's 11/13 NBC interview drew commentary. The Huffington Post's John Ridley highlights Mrs. Obama's belief "that soon the straggling blacks will 'wake up and get it'" and vote for her husband. Riley comments: "For Michelle Obama to claim that in terms of voting for her husband black America will one day 'wake up and get it' is to imply that any person of color who does not vote for Obama is somehow slumbering or stupid. ... Instead, I would say that Obama needs to earn his votes through consistency of message. He can't pass himself off as an agent of change, then pander to the homophobic crowd. He can't claim to stand against the war, then continually vote for its funding. He can't send mixed messages as to whether or not America would actually use its nuclear arsenal to protect itself."

Jack and Jill PoliticsRikyrah defends her: "I don't have to read any articles about Obama and the Black community - I live Obama and the Black community. ... I have my own family and our discussions about Obama. The generational split is pretty evident: I, my sisters, my cousins, 50 and younger, we were on board with Obama from the beginning. We've actually had to discuss, to debate, to convince our older relatives about Obama."

GOP FIELD: It's Gonna Be Close

Looking at recent polling, Pollster.com's Charles Franklin comments: "The rise of Mike Huckabee in Iowa is correctly seen as a big polling story. With limited money Huckabee has climbed into second place in the Iowa polls, and currently enjoys the sharpest upward trajectory of any Republican candidate there. ... The other bit of news from Iowa is the failure of the Thompson campaign to launch. For all the high expectations built up in the pre-campaign campaign of Thompson, Iowa voters have failed to respond. The trend has even taken a bit of a turn down in recent weeks. ... And the picture only gets worse for Thompson in New Hampshire where his trajectory looks like a failed rocket launch, now at less than 5% support.

Looking at just CBS' new poll, The Corner's David Freddoso notes: "1. Fred Thompson is not doing well, despite an ad in Iowa that's been running for a week. Give it more time, says adviser John McLaughlin; 2. McCain has surged, tying up with Giuliani in New Hampshire; 3. Ron Paul is catching on in New Hampshire, too."

GOP FIELD II: Rudy's Yin To Huckabee's Yang

NRO's Jim Geraghty blogs: "At what point do the bids of Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee - two sides of the economic-social conservative coin - become less about the candidates themselves and more as proxies for the social conservative wing and the economic conservative wings of the party? ... If Huckabee gets the nomination - probably the longest shot to gain the GOP nomination in a generation - it will be a shining success for social conservatives ... If Giuliani gets the nomination, we will see a thousand newsweekly articles about 'The Death of the Christian Right.'"

Townhall's Hugh Hewitt approves of Geraghty's analysis: "The built-in problems for Giuliani and Huckabee are that they each are viewed with great suspicion by one of the three Republican parties: the party of national security, the party of wealth, and the party of faith."

HUCKABEE: The Leadership Can Stick It

Townhall's Matt Lewis posts Mike Huckabee's reaction to the National Right to Life Committee's Fred Thompson endorsement: "I am disappointed by this decision but I also know that the very grassroots activists across America who have made the National Right to Life movement a success will continue to join my campaign. I am thankful for their continued dedication and support."

Lewis comments: "Translation: He got the hot-shot leadership, I'm getting the members ... This is similar to what Republicans often say when Labor Unions endorse Democrats. And you know what? There's a lot of truth to it."

MCCAIN: For The Surge Before It Was Cool

RCP Blog's Tom Bevan defends John McCain against netroots attacks over a video showing McCain calling a woman supporter's question, "how do we beat the bitch?" "excellent." Bevan writes: "The implication of those pimping the video is that by calling it "an excellent question" McCain is somehow endorsing the woman's language, but he quickly follows that remark by telling the crowd 1) that he's ahead of Clinton in a recent general election poll and 2) that he very much respects Mrs. Clinton and anyone else who might win the Democratic nomination."

Campaign Standard's Matthew Continetti links to David Brooks reminding readers, "While others stood by the failing Rumsfled-Abizaid-Casey strategy in Iraq, McCain - as early as September 2003 - pushed for the administration to send more troops to Iraq and adopt a counterinsurgency strategy there." Continetti comments: "Seems to me like that's a pretty strong case for McCain's candidacy."

PAUL: Bloggers Of The World Unite!

Wonkette pens an open letter to "whoever runs things at Redstate.com: "We don't care for your website. ... We may not like your internets, and you may not like ours, but we must work together to destroy a mutual enemy - illegal alien spambots, a.k.a. Paultards. ... We were impressed with your recent banning of Paultards. We have one or two that we kind of like, but we try our best to ban the others. ... This is a call for internet bipartisanship. We must bipartisan...ly declare war on the Paultards!"

The 'whoever' that runs things at RedState replies: "Dear Wonkette, Agreed. Bombing starts in five minutes."

ROMNEY: Scum Happens

Defending earlier thoughts on how Mitt Romney's Mormon faith could cost him, The Corner's David Freddoso posts an email from IA pro-lifer Meg Crawford: "I like Governor Romney. I have some reservations about his commitment to the right to life. He assures me now that he is pro-life, that he's been pro-life...but I still have some concerns about where he was when he was governor. I can't quite commit to him yet. There's something in me that just says no."

Also talking Romney and faith Hot Air's Allahpundit blogs: "There's a huge open question about how solidly conservatives would be willing to line up behind Mitt on the religious issue if he's attacked for it. Most will do so ... but the fact is that there are parts of the right-wing base even now who are warning him not to go around pretending like he's one of us. The left may sense an opening there to peel some of them away; the trick would be to cast enough aspersions on Mormonism to scare off those voters without casting so many that even centrist Democrats become disgusted by the tactic. ... The task for Hillary et al. would be to legitimize that calculus in voters' minds and get them to thinking where Mormonism falls on the spectrum between Dianetics and the Bible. A scummy tactic but not hard to imagine."

In more positive Romney blogging, NRO's Jim Geraghty looks at positive Romney numbers in IA, N, and SC, and concludes: "Because we're seeing an effect in several states where there is advertising, and not just where Romney picked up a big endorsement, I suspect the ads are what is driving the Romney surge. I would also note that we've seen little, if any, change in Romney's national numbers during this time."

In less positive Romney news, RedState's Erick Erickson notes: "[O]ne of the things that shored up a few folks wavering on the Romney v. Fred issue was this "menu" of services under the Romney Healthcare Plan in Massachusetts that charges just $50.00 for an abortion ($100.00 under the "Low Premium Plan"). It's one thing to hear about it, but it's a whole different ball game to see it printed in stark black and white on a menu."

THOMPSON: The Mystery Continues

Following the National Right to Life Committee's Fred Thompson endorsement, National Review sent NRLC some written questions to clarify their thinking. From the exchange:

• NRO: Did you hear what he had to say on Meet the Press the other day? He sounds like someone who buys into the conventional wisdom criticisms of pro-lifers: We want to "criminalize" women - throw them in jail. As Bob Novak put it, Senator Thompson "revealed astounding lack of sensitivity about the abortion issue." Are you schooling him or are you confessing we really do want to throw desperate women behind bars?
• NRLC: Neither National Right to Life nor Fred Thompson supports criminal penalties for women who have had abortions.
• NRO: Is the Thompson endorsement an indication that the National Right to Life Committee is abandoning its support for a Human Life Amendment?
• NRLC: National Right to Life continues to support a Human Life Amendment (HLA) as a goal. However, National Right to Life also knows that it will take a change of 25-30 Senate seats to even pass a Human Life Amendment out of the U.S Senate where a two thirds vote is required -not to mention, the required two-thirds vote in the U.S. House and three fourths of the states to ratify. It is very, very unlikely to happen in the next presidential term, and the President does not have a vote in the amendment process anyway.

RedState's Erick Erickson reports: "Thompson himself, I'm told, persuaded the NRLC in writing, giving himself very little room to later go squishy. ... One of the NRLC guys said they really liked seeing in writing, from Thompson, one point that I have been harping on as well. Thompson apparently made the case that candidates saying they'd appoint originalist judges was not enough. Thompson said the President needed to make sure key executive appointments who could affect abortion policy did, in fact, embrace and believe in the culture of life (I'm told he listed several departments by name). Having said that for a good while, I'm glad to see a candidate make the case. Contrast that with Rudy who says he'd pick the most qualified people. ... I'm also told that Thompson brought up Planned Parenthood's funding under Title X and said, in effect, he would cut it off."

MD 04: Stand By Your Man

NARAL pres. Nancy Keenan defends NARAL's Rep. Al Wynn (D) endorsement at The Huffington Post: "Congressman Wynn's consistently pro-choice voting record since his election in 1992 gives him the edge in our endorsement in this race -- and is why he's earned our endorsement in previous election cycles, too. ... In the 15 years that he has represented his district in Congress, Congressman Wynn has voted pro-choice 126 times on 127 votes that dealt with women's reproductive health. ... We stand with those who stand with us -- and Congressman Wynn has steadfastly done so during his 15 years in Congress. His voting record reflects his commitment to a woman's right to choose."

BLOGGERS VS MSM: If You Can't Beat 'Em

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas posts a Newsweek press release announcing his new gig as 'contributor for the 2008 presidential campaign' and comments: "Yeah, there's a lot of heads exploding in wingnutlandia today over this bit of news. But Newsweek is "balancing" me out with someone that should make heads on our side explode. Announcement on that name is still a couple of days off."

IMMIGRATION: Blogging The Posts Americans Won't Do

Noting that "no fewer than 1,400 pieces of legislation related to immigration had been introduced among the 50 state legislatures" through this year and that "of these bills, 182 in 43 states became law--most of which are contradictory, probably unconstitutional, and nearly impossible for businesses to follow" US Chamber of Commerce pres. Tom Donohue blogs at Huffington Post:

This action reinforces the need for a balanced, comprehensive federal solution that embraces the following four principles. First, Congress and the president should act immediately to address the pressing shortage of visas. ... Second, we need the systems, technologies, and infrastructure to secure our borders and give businesses the tools they need to easily and accurately verify the eligibility of their employees. ... Third, we must recognize that a large part of the solution to our longer-term immigration and border challenges is the continued economic development of Mexico and Latin America. ... Finally, we should not stop the flow of immigrants to our country but, rather, allow it to continue and even expand--prudently, sensibly, and lawfully. We need workers, and it makes far greater sense to normalize the undocumented immigrants already here than to send them back and start over.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Why Does Tim Hate The Earth?

The Huffington Post's Laurie David and Gene Karpinski lament:

This past week, NBC completed its Green Is Universal campaign -- a week-long effort to educate and engage the public by infusing its programming with environmental themes. The effort resulted in everything from Matt Lauer reporting from the Arctic circle to Al Gore making a cameo appearance on 30 Rock parodying himself. Throughout the week, global warming was front and center. And then there was Tim Russert.

How bad have Tim's interviews been? Over the past ten months, presidential candidates have made 16 appearances on Meet the Press. In the nearly three hundred questions he has asked the candidates, not once has he uttered the words "global warming." Not once. At the two debates Mr. Russert has moderated, he has found time to discuss a national smoking ban, the drinking age, Bible verses, baseball, and even UFOs but not once did he ask how candidates would address the climate crisis.

LEST WE FORGET: Mmmm, Sacrilicious

WSJ's Law Blog draws our attention to a footnote in a employment contract case. At issue: "Whether an employee's mere act of continuing to report for work after the effective date of her employer's arbitration program constituted acceptance of a valid and enforceable contract to arbitrate all employment-related disputes." The majority found the employee's conduct did constitute acceptance of a contract, but Judge Boyce Martin dissented: "A unilateral contract is one where an offeror 'reasonably expects to induce action of a definite and substantial character' from the offeree.' Implicit in this understanding is that the offeree is aware of the significance of the act performed. Without a signal that she understands that a contract is being made, how is one to know if she has truly accepted?" The authority for Judge Boyce's argument:

Homer Simpson talking to God: "Here's the deal: you freeze everything as it is, and I won't ask for anything more. If that is OK, please give me absolutely no sign. [no response] OK, deal. In gratitude, I present you this offering of cookies and milk. If you want me to eat them for you, please give me no sign. [no response] Thy will be done." The Simpsons: And Maggie Makes Three (Fox television broadcast, Jan. 22, 1995).