From NBC's Kelly Paice Today the White House honored the United States' leading scientists at the National Medal of Science and National Medal of Technology and Innovation Ceremony. President Obama recognized the vast importance of scientific innovation that has occurred throughout U.S. history and further expressed the significance of innovation today and for the future: "Science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, and our health, and our way of life than it has ever been. And the winners we are recognizing only underscore that point, with achievements in physics and medicine, computer science and cognitive science, energy technology and biotechnology." He added, "We need to ensure that we are encouraging the next generation of discoveries--and the next generation of discoverers."
President Obama stated that his administration has set a goal of devoting three percent of the nation's gross domestic product to scientific research and development, particularly investing in education and encouraging private innovation.
Tonight the First Couple will host a group of middle-school students on the South Lawn for a night of astronomy to highlight the president's commitment to science education. Pres. Obama expressed his eagerness for this evening's event and for the future of the nation's scientific advances and said, "They [the students] will peer through telescopes, wander through exhibits, and hopefully feel a sense of wonder that might one day lead them here to receive a medal themselves."
from NBC's Courtney Kube Defense Secretary Robert Gates forwarded an "informal copy" of General Stanley McChrystal's troop request to President Obama late last week. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said Wednesday that President Obama asked Gates for a copy of the request for additional forces in Afghanistan, despite the fact that the document came directly from McChrystal and had NOT yet been vetted by the military leadership and the chain of command.
Why step over his military leaders? Morrell said that Secretary Gates "saw what happened" when McChrystal's assessment was leaked and he "wanted to avoid any opportunity for leaking before" Obama had a chance to see the troop request. Typically, McChrystal would send his request to NATO leadership and to his boss at Central Command, General Petraeus, who would then forward it to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The Joint Chiefs would then provide it to Gates and ultimately it would end up on Obama's desk. The military leadership would provide their comments and recommendations at each step. Â
The troop request is now working its way through the proper chain of command.
by NBC's Ali Weinberg Minnesota Governor and RGA vice chairman Tim Pawlenty will be the featured guest at the Iowa Republican party's "signature fall event," a further indication that he is exploring a 2012 presidential bid.
The event, to be held this Saturday, is the latest in a series of moves by Pawlenty that raise his national profile. He officially opened his political action committee, the Freedom First PAC, last week and has rounded up several former George W. Bush campaign advisers.
His appearance in the state that holds the first presidential primary follows those of several other high-profile Republicans, including ex-Senator Rick Santorum (PA) last week and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal last November.
Iowa GOP Chairman Matt Strawn said about Pawlenty's appearance, "Governor Pawlenty is an innovative, conservative leader and, as Iowa Republicans prepare for a robust gubernatorial primary election and nationally-watched general election for governor, his message of balanced budgets, lower taxes, and market-based reforms for health care and education will resonate with all Iowans."Â
According to The Hill, the Iowa visit will be Pawlenty's first since 2008, and the "first time he will go with an agenda other than stumping for another presidential contender." The Hill also reports that tickets for the annual event have been dropped to $25 to make the event open to more than just the party's wealthy donors.
From NBC's Kelly Paice As today marks the eighth anniversary of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and while President Obama continues to weigh the future of the Afghan war, General David Petraeus gave a situation report on the U.S. Central Command region at the annual Association of the United States Army conference yesterday.
The general began with an explanation of CENTCOM's jurisdiction: an area comprised of 20 countries—the smallest of geographic combatant commands—but, as Gen. Petraeus described, it "has its lion share of problems." Rich in oil and natural resources, but plagued with such issues as war and ethnic and sectarian problems, CENTCOM is "an area of haves and have-nots…that has just about every challenge that you might consider," he contended.
Iraq is just one small part of the region, a country in which Gen. Petraeus called 2009 a "transition year" and where progress is "fragile and reversible." Nonetheless, progress is being made, as provincial governments become much more representative and as U.S. forces take on an "advise and assist" role, he furthered. U.S. forces will draw down to about 120,000 by the end of the month and to some 50,000 by the end of August next year, Petraeus predicted. "Iraqi security forces are very much shouldering tasks," he said, but added, "There are certainly still bad guys in Iraq…and a host of challenges still to be worked out."
General Ray Odierno, commander of Multi-National Force Iraq, recently assessed that violence in Iraq is down by about 85 percent since spring 2007. Gen. Petraeus reported that there were over 230 monthly high profile attacks in Iraq in early 2007, a number now down to about 25 per month. Gen. Petraeus further highlighted developments in Iraq afforded by improved security, such as the increase in electricity available, a rise in oil production, judicial capacity increases—for example, female trial judges are up 842 percent, although Gen. Petraeus recognized there were maybe two or three to begin with—and a showing increase in the perception of security, what Gen. Petraeus described as an "awfully important" factor.
Turning to Afghanistan, Gen. Petraeus agreed with General Stanley McChrystal's assessment of the Afghan situation as "serious but doable," that "requires a sustained substantial commitment." He furthered, "Everyone agrees that additional Afghan security forces are needed," in facing an industrial strength insurgency in the country. In addition to working to build a strong national security force in Afghanistan, Gen. Petraeus said that several community defense initiatives are currently being experimented with, as well. And he said that there is "no question that we have to take a regional approach," especially referring to the country's neighboring Pakistan where there has been "considerable concern and worry in the Swat valley" regarding Taliban operations; however, he furthered that there is "quite heartening progress" occurring in Pakistan. Also in the region, Gen. Petraeus called Iran "the best recruiting agent for CENTCOM," as its missile program causes "considerable concern" along with its uranium processing operations.
Further, the commander identified the Afghan narcotics industry as a problem along with "the overall corruption that has crept into the government." He called the legitimacy of the government "a key ingredient" to a stable, successful country. Despite "deterioration of security in certain areas," Gen. Petraeus detailed some of the progress occurring in Afghanistan, such as access to health care increasing nearly 90 percent since 2002, great advances in telecommunications, a rising GDP, and also a great increase in education enrollment—especially among Afghan girls. He also made clear that "reintegration of reconcilables" in Afghanistan is a priority.
He concluded that al-Qaeda "certainly in the region and arguably globally…is a considerably diminished organization." When asked to predict the U.S. commitment in Afghanistan, Gen. Petraeus was careful to only estimate a potential full development of Afghan security forces and a transfer of security leadership to the Afghans around 2013 or 2014, stressing that the development of those forces depends on the security of the region.
As top military leaders met with President Obama last week and will continue the discussion this week regarding the future steps to be taken in the region, Gen. Petraeus said, "My assessment is that we've had an ample opportunity to provide our best military advice."
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, Ali Weinberg, Kelly Paice and Huma Zaidi Razvi *** Deja-News: Another day, another handwringing meeting by politicians on the issue of Afghanistan. And on the health care front, it's another day, another delay on the Senate Finance Committee vote. First, Afghanistan: Nobody said the decision the president is facing was going to be easy and yesterday he got a taste of just how hard it is to find a middle ground when he said down with 30+ Congressional leaders from both parties. The highlight of the meeting appears to be the snippy exchange between President Obama and his '08 foe, John McCain. Depending on your point of view, it's either the picture of the wise Washington sage lecturing the young naive war president or the angry old guy snapping at the guy he still holds a grudge against for denying him the presidency. (Remember, when the C.W. crowd in Washington thought the loser of the Obama-McCain matchup would go out of their way to work with the new president?)Â As for the policy debate, today the president convenes the third session of his war council to focus for three hours on where Pakistan fits in. Vice President Biden, among others, is an advocate of a "Pakistan First" policy which says any decision in Afghanistan should be made through the prism of Pakistan stability and for eradicating the al Qaeda safe havens in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)/Northwest tribal region of the country.
*** The Public's Role: Lots of poll data to comb through today on the issue of the war. A new Quinnipiac survey indicates the president has some running room with the public, assuming he lays out a clear vision for the strategy. And folks should take note of the Pew poll on Iran as a hint of how quickly public opinion can move once a president lays the facts on the table. This new Pew poll shows broad support for potential military action against Iran to prevent the country from acquiring nuclear weapons. The numbers might be a mild shock to some but consider it was just TEN DAYS AGO that the president of the United States announced to the WORLD that Iran had a secret nuclear facility. Of course the country is going to respond the way the Pew poll showed. It's likely what will happen once the president announces his new Afghanistan-Pakistan policy in the next few weeks. When it comes to national security issues, presidents, INITIALLY, get the benefit of the doubt until the facts on the ground no longer support them.
*** Poll-ter ZeitGeist: Speaking of polls, lots of them out today. Republicans are all fired up by the latest Gallup numbers showing the generic Congressional ballot virtually tied. The more intriguing number in the Gallup survey is the cross tab among independents which has Republicans up. This is a continuing trend among this key middle group we've noticed for months now. Meanwhile, Democrats (in particular the White House) is all excited by the latest AP poll showing the president's job rating no longer mired in the 50-52% range and is now at 56%. It's one poll and Gallup's job rating for the president is still in the 50-52% range but worth keeping an eye on to see if this is the start of an upward trend.
*** Crossing The Delaware: Republicans got a big shot in the arm yesterday when Republican Congressman Mike Castle announced he would seek Joe Biden's old senate seat in Delaware. Castle was the ONLY Republican who could seriously put this seat in play and he's running. Now Democrats are waiting on Biden's son, Beau, to decide (BTW, he might be having more cold feet than some realize, so we're hearing). For those keeping track of our Senate rankings (which debuted Monday, Delaware would jump immediately to 4 on our list, displacing Missouri, meaning the top FOUR slots, are now all Democratic-held seats.)Â
*** Candidate Recruiting Wars: Castle is the type of candidate recruitment the Republicans need to have if they are truly going to make serious progress at whittling away at the Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate. In fact, we'd argue the next 60-90 days are crucial for the GOP on the recruiting front. It's prime time for them to make their case that the environment for the GOP is going to be a good one in 2010. There are a lot of potential candidates kicking the tires on a campaign from the North Dakota Senate to South Carolina's 5th District and plenty of places in between. Castle's decision to run (truly a surprise to many) might just be the thing John Cornyn at the NRSC and Pete Sessions at the NRCC can use to convince their fence sitters to run. BTW, speaking of recruiting, Republicans scored another big get in Iowa: former GOP Governor Terry Branstad opens a campaign committee today. Dem Governor Chet Culver, like every governor in the country, has mediocre poll ratings.
*** Throwing In The Towel? Just curious, but did it strike anyone else as odd that VA GOV Dem nominee Creigh Deeds decided to roll out his excuses for losing about a month BEFORE election day? Deeds in a Politico forum held last night.
"Frankly, a lot of what's going on in Washington has made it very tough. We had a very tough August because people were just uncomfortable with the spending; they were uncomfortable with a lot of what was going on, a lot of the noise that was coming out of Washington, D.C." Politico also has Deeds claiming he's now "reframing" the race "in an effort to shift the focus more toward state issues and away from a broader national debate." Then there is this headscratcher from Deeds. "I came out of the primary, and a lot of people didn't expect me to win," he said. "I had to spend a couple of months hunkering down, raising money. Bob [McDonnell] could build up his fundraising advantage to run soft and fuzzy ads and build up a lead over me." Why is this last Deeds statement a headscratcher? Because the DGA spent MILLIONS hitting McDonnell during the primary. BTW, if Deeds keeps blaming the national environment, does that mean he won't be asking Pres. Obama to campaign for him?
*** Continuing our series, here are states 3 and 4 on our 2010 watch list. For those tracking, Colorado and Ohio rank 1 and 2 respectively.Â
*** States To Watch In 2010 -- Florida: Once the ultimate battleground state in America (circa 2000), Florida still remains competitive and politically important, but a bit less so than at the turn of the century. The gubernatorial contest between Democrat Alex Sink and Republican Bill McCollum is one of the cycle's marquee races, and gives Democrats their best chance to win a governor's mansion they haven't won since 1994. Governor Charlie Crist is the front-runner for the open Senate seat, but he'll face a spirited primary from the young, telegenic conservative Marco Rubio (who seems to have galvanized more than just the base), and then most likely face a general election fight from Democratic Rep. Kendrick Meek (though there is still some chatter that national Democrats would like an alternative to Meek now that Crist doesn't look like a shoo-in). Freshman Democratic congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas bid for re-election is probably the state's top-tier House race though good 'ol Alan Grayson has certainly staked his claim on the top tier target list!
*** States To Watch In 2010 -- New Hampshire: New Hampshire's first-in-the nation primary status and its libertarian/independent streak ("Live Free or Die" and 40% independent registration) always make the Granite State something of a wild card. And it will be no different in 2010. The Senate contest here, to replace the retiring GOP Sen. Judd Gregg (R), is shaping up to be one of the top races of the cycle: The likely Democratic nominee is Representative Paul Hodes, while the GOP front-runner is ex-state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte. The biggest GOP hiccup to success in the senate race is going to the primary. Ayotte is a moderate in the mold of a Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe but that may not pass muster in a GOP primary here. Meanwhile, the state's two Democratic-held congressional seats could be competitive, especially with Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta (R) challenging incumbent Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D) in addition to the seat being vacated by Hodes. National Democrats are satisfied with Hodes but secretly wish they had a more proven statewide vote-getter. As with Colorado, Democrats have enjoyed tremendous success in the Granite State in the last few years -- winning two House seats, a Senate race, and also at the presidential level. Does that begin to change next year?
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 27 days Countdown to MA Special Primary: 62 days Countdown to MA Special Election: 104 days Countdown to Election Day 2010: 391 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails. Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone. Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.
The highlights of yesterday's bipartisan Congressional leader meeting with the President seem to be overshadowed by an exchange between Obama and his '08 foe, John McCain. Reports Politico's Lee: "Senator John McCain drew a sharp response from Obama during the meeting Tuesday afternoon when the Arizona Republican told his former opponent that he shouldn't be making a decision on a strategy for the war in such a "leisurely fashion," a source familiar with the meeting said.
A visibly irked Obama sharply replied that he is not making this decision in a "leisurely fashion," and moved on to the next member of Congress, the source said."
The Los Angeles Times notes the president indicated he was looking for a middle ground... if there is one.
The Washington Post report indicates the sharp partisan divide on the issue.
Adds the New York Times: "Meeting with leaders from both parties at the White House, Mr. Obama seemed to be searching for some sort of middle ground, saying he wanted to "dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan," as White House officials later described his remarks.
But as the war approached its eight-year anniversary on Wednesday, the session underscored the perilous crosscurrents awaiting Mr. Obama. While some Democrats said they would support whatever he decided, others challenged him about sending more troops. And Republicans pressed him to order the escalation without delay, leading to a pointed exchange between the president and Senator John McCain of Arizona, his Republican opponent from last year's election."
The Hill provides a readout of yesterday's meeting at the White House to discuss the way forward in Afghanistan where Republicans urged the president to embrace General McChrystal's approach and Democrats were divided over what to do. "The meeting demonstrated that if Obama decides not to seek additional troops, he and the Democrats who back him will be criticized for not supporting the decisions of his commanders on the ground… 'Many of us are committed to trying to build support for the president if he makes the right decision,' said House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA). But if Obama rejects McChrystal's call for more troops, Cantor said, Republicans will demand that the president make a 'compelling case.'"  Cantor also added that the president can't facilitate his plans without the support of congressional Republicans. "I believe on the national security front that it is the president's decision to make, but he will need the support of Congress to implement that decision," Cantor said.
The Hill adds: "An administration official said the president 'made it clear that his decision won't make everybody in the room or the nation happy, but underscored his commitment to work on a collaborative basis with the understanding that everyone wants what is best for the country' … The administration official said that the president told the lawmakers that he wants the debate over the way forward to 'be honest and dispense with the straw-man argument that this is either about doubling down or leaving Afghanistan.'"
There was a bit of miscommunication between the Democratic congressional leadership. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that the House would not give Obama a rubber-stamp vote on his plans. "Whether we agreed with it or voted for it remains to be seen, when we see what the president put forth,"Pelosi said. Moments before, however, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid suggested that everyone would line up behind the president, no matter what he decided. "The one thing that I think was interesting is that everyone, Democrats and Republicans, said whatever decision you make, we'll support it basically," Reid said, drawing a look of surprise from Pelosi." He "later backtracked and said it was the Republicans who had stated that they would support whatever decision the president made."
At the same gathering where Defense Secretary Robert Gates said military officers should provide their recommendations to the president in private, Gen. David Petraeus did… just the opposite. Both men spoke at the convention of the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) yesterday where Petraeus "said that the situation in Afghanistan needs 'sustained and substantial' commitment" but "refused to detail what a substantial commitment means and whether it would translate to sending more troops into Afghanistan," reports The Hill. This is the first time in months that Petraeus has spoken out about the war in Afghanistan.
Is the debate over Afghanistan really a battle of the books? The Wall Street Journal takes a look at how two books -- "'Lessons in Disaster,' on Mr. Obama's nightstand, and 'A Better War' on the shelves of military gurus -- have become a framework for the debate over what will be one of the most important decisions of Mr. Obama's presidency."
The Pentagon is establishing two new units devoted to the Afghan war, highlighting the military's focus on the conflict even as the White House considers scaling back the overall U.S. mission there," reports the Wall Street Journal. "The moves underline the military's efforts to remake itself in response to the Afghan war despite the Obama administration's signals that it is far from committed to the current counterinsurgency approach."
"The Taliban also chimed in and dared the U.S. to meet the surge request of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan," reports the New York Daily News. '"'You should know that we have a lot of patience and we are prepared for a long fight,' the Taliban said in e-mails to Western reporters."
A new Quinnipiac poll indicates the public will give the president a lot of running room on Afghanistan as long as the reason we're there is about fighting the terrorists... nation-building is something the public would NOT tolerate.
The Washington Post has an in depth look at an al Qaeda assassination attempt against a Saudi prince who is heading up the country's counter-terrorism efforts. The terrorist came from Yemen.
The New York Times looks at four swing vote senators on the Finance Committee: Rockefeller, Wyden, Snowe and Lincoln.
And the Washington Post looks at the White House's efforts to find non-Congressional Republicans to say positive things about their health care reform attempts.
Three Democratic senators from purple-ish and red states -- Webb, Bayh and Lincoln -- are calling on Majority Leader Harry Reid to post the health care legislation and CBO score online before holding the vote.
Democratic House leaders "said they will present rank-and-file members with options Wednesday for how to proceed on outstanding issues and will begin moving toward a final bill."
Per NBC's Ken Strickland, Republicans are also calling for measures likely to slow down the Senate Finance Committee's vote on its health care bill, and bring more attention to the bill's costs, taxation and penalties on Americans. Republicans yesterday wrote a letter to Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus asking that officials from Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation be present for question before the panel votes. They also asked that "there will be enough time to look at the score," the CBO's cost estimate of the bill.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) is facing "friendly fire" from two fellow Big Sky Democrats. "Sen. Jon Tester and Gov. Brian Schweitzer have taken issue with the section of Baucus' health care package that calls for the states to contribute to the cost of expanding Medicaid eligibility as a means to provide coverage to millions of uninsured, middle-income Americans who are not poor enough to qualify." While both have said they support most of the Baucus bill, they, like many other officials are raising concerns about the impact of health care reform on state budgets.Â
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is not helping move Democratic health care reform efforts along, Roll Call reports. He is making a "last-minute push for an amendment that they contend would tear at the fabric of their health care reform plan." But Wyden, "who has for years pursued a bipartisan health care reform bill that would dismantle the employer-based system of providing health insurance," said conversations with Democratic leadership "have been very positive…I've just been talking to them how to best work through the process to improve the bill," Wyden said.
A new AP-GfK poll should give Democrats reason for cautious optimism: opposition numbers are down, but reform has nothing like overwhelming support. "The public is split 40-40 on supporting or opposing the health care legislation, the poll found. An even split is welcome news for Democrats, a sharp improvement from September, when 49 percent of Americans said they opposed the congressional proposals and just 34 percent supported them." A key group's opposition has also fallen: "Among seniors, opposition fell from 59 percent in September to 43 percent now. Almost four in 10, 38 percent, now support it, compared with 31 percent in September."Â
A stimulus by any other name: "The White House and some Democratic leaders have been open to an extension of unemployment benefits including health care benefits, as well as an extension of an expensive tax credit for new homebuyers sought by the hard-hit real estate industry — all the while trying to convince reporters that such spending shouldn't be called a "stimulus." A $500 transportation bill has also been suggested to help unemployed voters, but Democrats are wary of Republicans saying the first package didn't work by pointing to a second attempt.Â
Regulatory bodies like the Office of Thrift Supervision, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC are now facing the threat of being condensed into one entity, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. John Bowman, the acting director of the thrift office, says he and the other regulatory groups "have been unfairly blamed for the economic crisis. 'We have very real concerns. To dismiss it as simply being turf is selling us short,' said Bowman."
We're guessing that the testimony of five Constitutional scholars about the czar issue won't be enough to quiet conservative critics.
While the latest Gallup poll has nothing but bad news for the Obama administration, this new AP poll indicates that his job rating has gone up for the first time since he became president. "People also feel better about his handling of the economy and his proposed health care overhaul. But not about the war. Support for the war in Afghanistan has declined, the poll said Tuesday. And approval of Obama's handling of it is holding steady — in contrast to his gains in other areas — as he considers a big troop increase there. Poll respondents narrowly oppose the increase."
President Obama will attend a $30,400-per-couple DNC fundraiser in Manhattan on October 20.
The Wall Street Journal looks at the correlation between the unemployment rate and Election Day. "Republicans are already harnessing voter unease over deficit spending and proposed changes to the health-care system. But they see the economy as the Democrats' main vulnerability… Officials at the National Republican Campaign Committee said they planned to use the weak employment numbers to hammer at 54 Democratic House members that Republicans deem the most vulnerable in 2010. Republicans are particularly targeting the 49 House lawmakers in districts carried last November by Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee."
A new Gallup poll has the generic Congressional ballot essentially tied. The bigger problem for Democrats: Republicans are leading among indie voters.
BTW, just 36% of DEMOCRATS!?!?!? approve of the job Congress is doing. A stunning 18-point collapse since last month.
VIRGINIA: It's Oct. 7, just under a month until Election Day and Creigh Deeds is already looking for excuses? So does this mean he does NOT want Pres. Obama to campaign for him?
The Wall Street Journal suggests that the White House is taking itself out of public eye in regard to the Virginia gubernatorial race, "seeking to conserve its political capital and avoid close association with a candidate who might lose," although it still supports Democratic candidate Creigh Deeds. Calling Virginia a "testing ground for Democrats," The Wall Street Journal describes the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia "an early indicator of Democrats' likely fortunes" in 2010.
In a round of "Battleground Virginia" interviews, the Virginia gubernatorial nominees touched on issues from taxes to abortion, and Republican candidate Bob McDonnell stressed that his campaign has been running on "kitchen-table issues such as jobs and roads." Democrat Creigh Deeds suggested that the national politics of his party have "made it very tough" for his campaign, as he still trails his Republican opponent in the polls. "We had a very tough August because people were just uncomfortable with the spending; they were uncomfortable with a lot of what was going on, a lot of the noise that was coming out of Washington, D.C.," Deeds said.
Governor Tim Kaine (D), chairman of the Democratic National Committee, called on Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds to continue to close the gap on his Republican challenger Bob McDonnell, saying "now it is up to Creigh in the late innings to make the simple sell for himself. ... And that's what will take this race to a winning race," The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports.
NEW JERSEY: New Jersey campaign donors have found a way to sidestep campaign finance laws in the state, as the New Jersey Star-Ledger reports that by looking at Virginia's campaign finance database, ironically you can find hundreds of thousands of dollars that have been funneled to support the New Jersey gubernatorial candidates--Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine and Republican Chris Christie. The Star-Ledger writes, "Some of that money came from companies barred from making big money donations in New Jersey. Other contributions came from those already maxed out in what they may give to candidates."
DELAWARE: Castle is in. Yesterday, Rep. Mike Castle announced that he will run for Vice President Joe Biden's Senate seat. "Castle's decision gives Republicans a major recruiting win and a strong possibility of picking up a Democratic-held Senate seat for the first time since 2004," writes the Hill. "But Castle's entry will not guarantee the seat goes to Republicans. Castle will most likely face a tough challenge from Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, the vice president's son, who has been rumored to be contemplating a bid. He has been serving in Iraq over the past year… No reliable polls have been taken recently, but strategists in both parties acknowledge that a Castle-Biden showdown would instantly become one of the most competitive races in the country."
IOWA GOVERNOR: Republicans have scored a BIG recruiting coup in the all-important swing state of Iowa as former Gov. Terry Branstad will formally open a cmte to challenge Dem Gov. Chet Culver.
SARAH PALIN: On her Facebook page, Palin comes out for the troop increase in Afghanistan. Palin says in a posting on her Facebook page Tuesday that this is "not the time for cold feet, second thoughts, or indecision." Instead, the former Alaska governor writes it's time "to act as commander in chief and approve the troops so clearly needed in Afghanistan."
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, Ali Weinberg and Kelly Paice *** Where's The War? Today, the debate over the war in Afghanistan and the war with al- Qaeda enters another stage as the president puts a spotlight on the efforts his administration (and President Bush's administration) has put into attacking al Qaeda in countries OUTSIDE of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. The president visits the National Counterterrorism Center, the chief clearing house where intelligence is shared and analyzed across law enforcement agencies and the military. It's a place that will look familiar to "24" fans. It gets to the nut of the debate inside the White house: how much of the war against al Qaeda is confined to the Af-Pak region and how much of it is still global? Senior officials involved in the day-to-day terror battle tell us that they don't want folks to conflate al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Al-Qaeda is viewed as a global terror threat. The Taliban is viewed by the administration as an "indigenous extremist organization" focused on destabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan. As one administration official told NBC News, the goal is to defeat the Taliban but the goal is to DESTROY al-Qaeda. That may seem like nuance but it gets at one other debate point, which is: just how much of a national security threat is the TALIBAN.
*** Taliban vs. Al Qaeda: Don't miss John McCain on the TODAY show arguing that you can't separate al Qaeda and the Taliban. "The Taliban is making gains. Al-Qaeda will return if the Taliban takes over, not to mention the horrible things that would happen to the Afghan people if the Taliban returned to power. But they're not…I strongly disagree with those who allege they are separate problems. They've worked together in the past, they would work together in the future. The urgency here ... is that there is 68,000 already there, Americans are dying, the situation is deteriorating. We have to turn it around and as far as General McChrystal speaking out, you know, we wish they had spoken out earlier in the Iraq war. We certainly wish they had spoken out during the Vietnam War." BTW, Dem Sen. Jim Webb was on "Morning Joe," making the point there are only 100 or so members of al-Qaeda actually in Afghanistan. Talk about a fascinating potential debate: McCain v. Webb.
*** Chain of Command: If it wasn't clear over the weekend, Defense Secretary Robert Gates made it crystal when he took a veiled swipe at General Stanley McCrystal and other uniformed Pentagon personnel who have gone public with their opinions regarding the current strategy debate regarding the war in Afghanistan. Said Gates: "It is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations provide our best advice to the president candidly, but privately." Gates didn't make this comment in some sort of Q&A session but in prepared remarks early yesterday. Clearly, some in the administration are annoyed that this debate is so public and it does put the president in a political box that this administration doesn't want to deal with: that NOT adding troops somehow makes Obama look weak. It may explain why there is an attempt to refocus the public (and those in Washington) on the counter-terrorism efforts taking place OUTSIDE the war zone in places like Somalia, Indonesia, Yemen, Mali (in West Africa) and even New York City.
*** Speaker Comes Up Roses: The other big presidential event today is the president's meeting with a slew of Congressional leaders from both parties, on the issue of Afghanistan. The fascinating aspect of the meeting is that you'll have views represented from all sides including Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the left who is very leery of sending more troops to Afghanistan and Pres. Obama's '08 opponent, Republican Senator John McCain, a strong advocate for the McCrystal surge plan of 40,000 more troops. This meeting may be as much about the president taking the temperature of Congress and seeing what they will and won't support as it is about him soliciting yet more advice. BTW, the president convenes the third Afghanistan strategy session with his war council TOMORROW. The focus of THAT meeting: Pakistan.
*** Speaking of Congress: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was on Charlie Rose last night and once again seemed to hint at flexibility on health care specifically on the public option. Here are her direct quotes: "We will bring a bill to the floor in the House of Representatives that has a public option in it. It's necessary because it will lower cost. A robust public option saves $110 billion in the bill. Pressed on the issue of reconciling with the Senate and her blue dogs, Pelosi then said: "And we're listening to each other. And we will build consensus, and it won't be anything direction that we will give. But it will be the consensus of those who want healthcare reform as to how we go forward." Pelosi said her hope is to send a bill to the president to sign by Thanksgiving.
*** Battleground 2009: There's big news for both gubernatorial races today. For the first time in the New Jersey race, Dem Governor Jon Corzine leads Republican Chris Christie in a reputable poll. Corzine's up 44%-43%, according to a Fairleigh Dickinson-PublicMind poll. Despite Corzine's new lead (within the poll's margin of error), the candidate whose numbers have really been moving is independent Chris Daggett—although only four percent of poll respondents volunteered that they will vote for Daggett, his support rose to 17% when his name was read with the other two choices. Votes for Daggett are the "anti-incumbent" vote, for those who don't want to support either major party candidate. If Daggett can sustain this support, the math might just stay in Corzine's favor. In Virginia, the local ABC affiliate airs a debate between Creigh Deeds (D) and Bob McDonnell (R). The two will answer questions submitted through Google Moderator, a program that solicits voters' questions through text and YouTube. The nominees will also be interviewed by ABC 7's Leon Harris and Politico's John Harris.
*** States To Watch In 2010 -- Continuing our 2010 current raisers, we delve into some of the key battleground states for the midterms, our top 12 to watch. We're rolling out two a day. These states are ones that we believe we essentially tell us two things: 1) the story of the 2010 midterms. 2) set the table for the 2012 landscape. All of these states have at least one MAJOR statewide race (most have two) as well as some key House races. Our top two states are in a class by themselves in significance: Ohio and Colorado. Both sport competitive Senate, gubernatorial and House races and both will be key 2012 battlegrounds as they were MAJOR 2008 swing states.
*** Ohio: In 2006, Democrats' success in the Buckeye State -- winning both the races for Senate and governor -- turned out to be a good predictor of their presidential victory (in the state and in the Electoral College) two years later. Will Ohio in 2010 also tell us something about 2012? Next year, this state will have it all: a competitive Senate contest (Democrats Lee Fisher or Jennifer Brunner vs. most likely Republican nominee Rob Portman), a competitive gubernatorial race (incumbent Democrat Ted Strickland vs. Republican John Kasich), and at least one top-tier House contest (Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy defending her seat). We expect more actually. What's more, the state remains perhaps the top presidential battleground state. If Obama holds on to it in 2012, that makes it incredibly difficult for Republicans to get to 270 electoral votes. BTW, if either Portman or Kasich win in 2010, look for one or both of them to immediately make it on to 2012 GOP running mate lists.
*** Colorado: Among the competitive states across the country, there perhaps isn't one where the Democrats have had more success than in Colorado. In 2004, they won the open Senate seat; in 2006, they won the governor's mansion; and in 2008, they picked up another Senate seat and Obama won the state. Also in the last few years, they've picked up three congressional seats and control of the state legislature. But is that Democratic dominance going to come to an end next year? Obama's poll numbers have dropped in the state. So have incumbent Governor Bill Ritter's numbers (his most likely opponent next year will be former GOP Representative Scott McInnis). Appointed Senator Michael Bennet now faces a primary challenge from state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, as well as one of a crowded field of GOP candidates. Democratic Representative Betsy Markey, who beat Marilyn Musgrave last year, is one of the Republicans' top House targets for 2010. If there is one battleground state from 2008 where Republicans are feeling VERY good about, it's Colorado. The independent vote in this state is VERY volatile and, right now, that's a good thing for the GOP.
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 28 days Countdown to MA Special Primary: 63 days Countdown to MA Special Election: 105 days Countdown to Election Day 2010: 392 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails. Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone. Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.
Today, the president heads to the National Counterterrorism Center in an effort to highlight what is, essentially, the global war on al-Qaeda, though the administration hesitates to use the phrase "war on terror."  "Shortly after taking office, Obama discarded the term "global war on terror," along with some of its most controversial tools, and aides describe a president who has been deliberative in implementing his own security policy. He has come under fire for not abandoning some of George W. Bush's policies, such as warrantless wiretapping and rendition, and faced criticism for jettisoning others, including enhanced interrogation techniques and secret prisons."
Also today, President Obama meets with a bipartisan group of congressional leaders today to discuss the worsening situation in Afghanistan, The Hill reports. The session, which will include House Minority Leader John Boehner, Minority Whip Eric Cantor and Armed Services Committee ranking member Buck McKeon is "the first time in six months that House Republican leaders have been invited to the White House to discuss official business.
And press secretary Robert Gibbs "refused to rebuke Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the head of U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan who publicly advocated sending more troops to the region," after National Security Advisor Jim Jones said on this Sunday's morning talk shows that military leaders should be less vocal about their strategy preferences in Afghanistan. "Far be it from me to parse the words of a four-star general," Gibbs said of Jones.
The thwarted terrorist attack in NYC is an example, the White House tells us, of how the international intelligence gathered is used to help law enforcement officials here in the states.
Bush 41 National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft continues to be supportive of the direction of the Obama foreign policy but cautioned the administration on retreating in Afghanistan.
"He said Mr. Obama's choice of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal to lead U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan implied a commitment to defeating the Taliban insurgency as the best way of preventing terrorist attacks on the United States."
The Pentagon has some new elite units they are deploying to Afghanistan: experts on the tribal politics of the country.
BTW, there doesn't seem to be disagreement over whether the Taliban has gotten stronger in Afghanistan.
The relationship between Pakistan and the U.S. is partially responsible for what the Obama administration says is a successful stepped up effort to destroy top al-Qaeda leaders and yet Pakistani government officials seem hesitant allowing more U.S. presence in their country
Joe Violante, the national legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, an advocacy group, has an "increasingly complex" job, as he now speaks not only for World War II, Vietnam, Korea and first Gulf War veterans, but also younger vets returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. This year may, however, bring a major success for the 59-year-old Vietnam vet: "Congress is on the cusp of approving advance appropriations for the Department of Veterans Affairs, which would ensure that injured soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, and other veterans, have predictable medical-care funding. This would give the VA much more certainty over its funding, as it would know its budget a year in advance." Over the past two decades, Congress "has routinely passed the agency's funding late."
On MSNBC's "Way Too Early" today, General Barry McCaffrey, an MSNBC military analyst, told host Willie Geist that the viewpoint of General Stanley McChrystal, the coalition commander in Afghanistan who has publicized his recommendation of a troop increase there, is being politicized. "It seems to me that McChrystal isn't a political animal anyway. He's the best fighter we've produced in the last 25 years in the army and I think now his viewpoint is being manipulated in the Washington debate. So what else is new?"
In his keynote address at the 2009 Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting and Exposition in Washington D.C. yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that U.S. decisions on how best to move forward in Afghanistan should be taken only after advice from civilians and the military has been received 'candidly and privately,' Marine Corps Times writes, adding: "His comment on getting advice to the president "privately" could be interpreted as a knuckle rap for Afghanistan commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal, whose Afghanistan assessment document was leaked to the press."
President Obama met yesterday with about a hundred doctors from "Red States, Blue States," and some professional physicians' organizations like the American Medical Association, which "has endorsed the House version of the healthcare reform bill that does away with the Medicare payment formula doctors have long opposed." The president said that 'at this point we've heard all the arguments,' and he looked past the 'crazy claims about death panels' and arguments that his plan would amount to government-run healthcare."
After President Obama met with the group of doctors, some Republicans asserted "that there is significant opposition in the health care community to the president's plans. In an interview, Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), an orthopedic surgeon, said Monday that there is significant disagreement among rank-and-file doctors with the decision of their leadership to support Obama's plans. "I'm a member of the [American Medical Association], and I'm in pretty close contact with them," Barrasso said. "There are a lot of members of the AMA who do not support this." Barrasso "derided" the White House event yesterday as "a publicity stunt."
Roll Call: "What Democrats really want, it seems, is for [Senator Olympia] Snowe (R-ME) to end all the drama over her vote." Her spokesman said yesterday that she is still undecided on how she will vote on the Senate Finance Committee's bill, and is awaiting the CBO's final estimate of its overall cost. Majority Leader Reid and Obama "need to know Snowe's intentions before they make a final decision on how to craft some of the most contentious provisions in that merged measure." Snowe's challenge in the debate: If she votes against a bill she helped craft with a bipartisan team, "liberal Democrats may take that as a sign that negotiating for her vote could constitute a bridge too far. If she votes for it, she may send a signal that she's too easy and tempt Democrats to push her limits on a public insurance option."
What is going on at the Chamber of Commerce? It seems like every day some major corporation is announcing they are pulling out over the climate issue. "Disagreements are common in large trade associations. But resignations over policy are rare, an indication of how high the stakes are in opposing a top-agenda item of a sitting president."
Politico's Gerstein has some Obama palace intrigue surrounding the blame game on Gitmo, which centers on White House Counsel Greg Craig.
The New York Times tries to find an answer to the question of what programs will the Obama administration propose to create jobs, as the president pledged over the weekend.
Republicans criticized President Obama for deciding not to meet with the Dalai Lama this week. "'The U.S. is kowtowing to Beijing again by refusing to meet with His Holiness,' said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL), the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee," The Hill reports. "The Obama administration is seeking cooperation with China on a range of issues," from imposing sanctions on Iran to "re-balancing trade and savings patterns."
The New York Post writes that in his latest weekly radio address, Obama "repeated almost verbatim his earlier address when talking about health-insurance companies."
Politico checks in on Ways and Means Chair Charlie Rangel and the ethics cloud that hangs over his head.
What we don't understand, btw, is how Rangel ended up doing a stimulus event in New York City yesterday with an Obama Treasury official. One would think something like that would have been vetted. BTW, the House GOP resolution on ousting Rangel from his committee slot may be voted on this week.
 The Washington Post catches on the talking point we've seen pop up recently among GOPers, and that's tying ACORN to the powerful SEIU union.
"Last week, Republican Representatives Mark Steven Kirk and Peter Roskam of Illinois and Patrick T. McHenry of North Carolina urged the Census Bureau to stop allowing the SEIU to help recruit workers for its 2010 head count. "There's simply no place for a group so closely connected to ACORN to be part of something of such national importance as the U.S. Census," Roskam said. "Some liberal groups say that Republican complaints about the SEIU represent guilt by association."
NEW JERSEY: The candidates for New Jersey's governorship explain their plans to boost the state's economy and bring jobs to its people, The New Jersey Star-Ledger reports. Democratic nominee Gov. Jon Corzine said, "Right now I think the No. 1 priority—how do you get the economy going—you have to grow our markets and grow our markets by having people work. When you create jobs, you create revenues for individuals, who then go into markets and create revenues for the state. That's what we have to do, create jobs, jobs, jobs." When asked how he plans to create jobs in New Jersey, Republican candidate Chris Christie said, "Lowering of taxation and the lowering of regulation"; while in response to the same question, Independent candidate Chris Daggett responded, "Greater investment in higher education and developing collaborative relationships between higher education and industry."
A new poll released Tuesday has the top New Jersey gubernatorial nominees neck-and-neck, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports. The Fairleigh Dickinson University-PublicMind Poll gives Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine 44 percent and his Republican challenger Chris Christie 43 percent-—the difference within the poll's margin of error.
VIRGINIA:USA Today calls the Virginia gubernatorial race "a referendum" on the Obama presidency: "In winning the White House, Obama became the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia since 1964. Now, Republicans here say, the political tide is turning." Democratic candidate Creigh Deeds admitted that his campaign has been affected by Obama being in the White House. "You've got a president who is trying to do things, and he's ruffling feathers," Deeds said. Bob McDonnell, the Republican challenger, furthered, "The overall political atmosphere is certainly much different now than it was in 2008 when the president won. ... We've got a lot more enthusiasm and energy on our side."
One of the top supporters of Bob McDonnell, Republican candidate for Virginia governor, was caught "mocking Democrat R. Creigh Deeds' stammer," the Richmond Times-Dispatch writes. The co-founder of Black Entertainment Television, Sheila C. Johnson, apologized for her imitation of Deeds at an event with McDonnell; however, McDonnell chose to continue to attack Deeds for his inability to "express any vision for Virginia's future."
ILLINOIS: "State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) raised $1.1 million in the third quarter and will report having $2.4 million in cash on hand at the end of September," Roll Call reports, which gives him a slight lead over likely Republican nominee Mark Kirk, who raised $1.6 million in the third quarter, and will report having $2.3 million in cash on hand at the end of September."
NEVADA: Yesterday, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee tried to use the [John Ensign] scandal to attack Sue Lowden, the top GOP challenger to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in next year's election, over her ties to Ensign. DSCC Executive Director Eric Schultz called Lowden's repeated refusals to distance herself from Ensign "disturbing" in an e-mail to Democratic supporters on Monday… Lowden has said she hopes Ensign, who is already the subject of a preliminary Senate Ethics Committee investigation, would help campaign for Republicans. NEW HAMPSHIRE: The latest poll results from the University of New Hampshire show former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R) with a 7-point lead, 40%-33%, over Rep. Paul Hodes (D) "although a quarter of the voters surveyed were undecided a little more than a year before Election Day… The poll also showed Ayotte, who has attracted several primary challengers since her announcement, with more consolidated party support than Hodes had. Ayotte was backed by 76 percent of self-identified Republicans, while Hodes was favored by 61 percent of Democrats."
NEW YORK: The National Republican Congressional Committee makes its way into the NY-23 special election with "its second TV ad that ties the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, to Gov. David Paterson and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi," New York Daily News writes. Washington Republicans have "taken the lead" in getting Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R) elected.
A new batch of Republican mailers are attempting to make Gov. Paterson "an albatross on the necks of Senate Democrats going into next year's campaign. The glossy mailers blame Senate Democrats for helping Gov. Paterson institute some $8 billion in new taxes and fees this year's budget, including the elimination of the popular STAR tax rebate program. The fliers are flooding mailboxes in key Senate districts at a time when the rebate checks would have normally arrived."
Governor Paterson called on "phantom" candidates for New York Governor "to say publicly why they would make better governors," the New York Post reports. "When all these phantom people who say they're running for governor get into this race, they are going to have to same questions I've been answering for 18 months," Paterson said during an appearance on CNBC's "Squawk Box." He continued, "If they wanted to show that they were different and exciting and would make Albany a different place, why don't they answer those questions now." When asked if he was referring to former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani or state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Paterson said he wasn't "talking about anybody in particular."
NYC MAYOR: The Teamsters Local 237 union is expected to endorse New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg for re-election, the New York Daily News reports, "even after a handful of its 20,000 members were laid off in city budget cuts." This endorsement comes as Bloomberg's opponent, City Controller William Thompson, received the support of New York U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, who "backed their fellow Democrat without undermining Bloomberg."Â
IOWA SENATE: So the Democrats can find a credible challenger to Chuck Grassley in 2010 but the GOPers are struggling in places like Indiana, North Dakota and Wisconsin? BTW, the two big names mentioned on the Democratic side in Iowa: trial lawyer/'82 gubernatorial nominee Roxanne Conlin and former first lady Christie Vilsack.
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR:Â Bill Clinton formally entered the Democratic primary race by appearing for San Fran Mayor Gavin Newsom. "The endorsement by Clinton, a popular figure among deep-pocketed Democratic donors, comes as Newsom desperately seeks to gain traction on state Attorney General Jerry Brown, who leads handily in early polls and fundraising."
From NBC's Kelly Paice As the Obama administration looks to bring peace to the Middle East, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars hosted a discussion today titled, "The U.S., Hamas, and the Pursuit of Israeli-Palestinian Peace," bringing three Mideast experts together to discuss the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and potential for resolution.
Robert Pastor, an International Relations professor and senior adviser to the Carter Center on Conflict Resolution and the Middle East, suggested that Pres. Obama has moved the U.S. from a lawyer-like relationship with the Middle East to one of an "honest broker." Pastor furthered, "I think Obama is on the right track"; however, Elliott Abrams, former deputy national security adviser for Middle Eastern Affairs in the George W. Bush administration said, "I think Obama's [Mideast] policy has already failed." Aaron David Miller, a Public Policy Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center, weighed in that an agreeable "policy is about finding balance about what's possible and what's probable" in the Middle East.
Pastor suggested that one important action by the Obama administration was the appointment of George Mitchell as the special envoy to the Middle East, whom he called "an expert at mediation." Pastor outlined his opinion of the two essential aspects of the Obama administration's focus in the Middle East so far: one, the importance of a two-state solution and, two, the importance of freezing settlements in the region. Pastor called the president "wise" for focusing on settlements and his efforts to move along negotiations between Israel and Palestine: "The president has been outstanding in defining a comprehensive approach," in this Middle East conflict--yet no negotiations have taken place yet.
On the other hand, Abrams suggested that the Obama administration has developed an "obsession with settlement expansion" that doesn't correlate with the concerns of the Palestinian people. Abrams further suggested that the idea of settlement expansion is a "product of George Mitchell and Rahm Emanuel's views," a reference to Pres. Obama's White House chief of staff who is intimately involved with this issue. Abrams concluded that U.S. involvement in a Mideast peace agreement is "really at a dead end right now." He predicted that there will be negotiations, but said, "I don't think they'll make much progress." Abrams insisted, "We should be less interested in negotiation tables and more interested in what's going on on the ground."
When asked if it would be better for "Hamas to be crushed" or to persuade the group to be a part of the peace process, Pastor suggested that it is "clear" that Hamas reflects a substantial body of the population and that it is "not possible to crush Hamas." Although the Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel, Pastor said that if a peace agreement were to be reached and Hamas were to recognize Israel, the preamble of the agreement would have to include "neutral recognition followed by renunciation of violence."
When addressing the question if it were possible to have a peace process without Palestinian unity, Pastor said, "I think so," stressing, however, that it would be "necessary to give Hamas an incentive not to sabotage the agreement."
Abrams weighed in, saying, "I don't think the U.S. should change its approach to Hamas," and furthered that "negotiations with terrorists can work only when it's known that the terrorists can be beaten." And Abrams furthered that right now Hamas believes "it's winning," and "its victory is victory for terrorists everywhere." Pastor made clear that "terror is not a generalized goal" for Hamas--their ultimate goal is an independent Palestinian state and they use terror to achieve their goal.
Miller recognized that there would be consequences if the U.S. were to fail at accomplishing a peace agreement and said, however, that "the problem with this administration is it wants a conflict-ending agreement" but lacks the political will, determination, and leadership to achieve it: "I believe trying to find an answer to this problem is essential. ... What is required is clarity and strategy."
Pastor concluded that "Obama did take a risk at setting this as a goal," and said that Pres. Obama needs to ask the question, "What leverage do I have?" He furthered, "Everyone will need to take some risk for peace. ... I think the status quo is not sustainable."
From NBC's Bobby Cervantes President Obama is set to be the keynote speaker at the annual dinner of the nation's largest LGBT rights organization on Saturday--just one day before thousands are expected to march in Washington, DC calling for more action on gay rights issues, according to The New York Times.
The Human Rights Campaign today confirmed the president's planned appearance, saying they were "honored to share this night with President Obama, who has called upon our nation to embrace LGBT people as brothers and sisters."
An issue sure to be front and center during this weekend's HRC-endorsed National Equality March is the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays in the military.
Asked about the Obama administration's promise to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law, National Security Advisor James Jones said on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday that the president would tackle the issue at the "appropriate time." When pressed for a specific time, Jones said "it's not years, but I think ... it'll be teed up appropriately."
The speech follows an open invitation sent to President Obama two weeks ago by longtime gay rights activist and co-chair of the National Equality March Cleve Jones urging the president to speak at the at the Capitol on Sunday.
While there are no plans for Obama to speak to the marchers, Saturday's event marks the second time a sitting president speaks to the HRC. (President Clinton first accepted the organization's invitation in 1997.)
Over the past few weeks, Florida GOP Gov. Charlie Crist has found himself being put on the defensive more and more in the primary thanks to the challenge by ex-state House Speaker Marco Rubio. While Crist has financially overwhelmed Rubio to date, there are many Republicans --Â particularly those in Flordia that are close to former GOP Gov. Jeb Bush -- who have publicly become more comfortable airing their skepticism about Crist in public. One of those Republicans with close ties to the Bush family, Karl Rove, has signaled his preference with his wallet. Rove confirms to NBC News that he has contributed a $1000 to Rubio's campaign, the donation will be made public when Rubio files his next FEC report (due Oct. 15).
This comes on the heels of Jeb Bush's public signal that he plans to stay neutral in the Crist-Rubio primary; Many believe this is Jeb's way of quietly telling influential Florida Republicans that he'd prefer Rubio but doesn't want to alienate Crist since he's still the heavy favorite in the primary. For Rubio, he needs to show some viability and that begins with his next fundraising report. But the most important fundraising report might actually be by the end of the year when you'll truly be able to see how Rubio's been able to use the Jeb neutrality (support?) to his advantage. Remember, Jeb is to Florida Republicans what Reagan is to the party nationally, he's held in THAT high of regard.
Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported a Rove donation to Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's Texas gubernatorial campaign. Rove has not given Hutchison any money. It was simply an incorrect fact that should not have been included.Â
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, Ali Weinberg and Kelly Paice *** Doing Something: As some predicted, the president's failed Olympics effort is providing the context for a bigger look at the president's accomplishments. And the first organization to weigh in? None other than "SNL." Their skit is providing the context for a storyline about the various unfinished promises made by candidate Obama. While amusing and somewhat devastating, the skit is actually a reminder of this bigger fact: the president has a lot of balls in the air, in fact, they are ALL in the air at this point: health care, the economy (jobs, stimulus and bailouts), Afghanistan, Iraq, climate change, Iran, Russia relations, China relations... and the list could go on. What the "SNL" skit also underscores is that this president desperately needs a win and needs a win soon. A lot of initiatives begin with great promise of accomplishment but getting them across the finish line is proving difficult, whether it's Iran (nuclear inspections don't begin now until LATE October; yet another delay by the Iranians) to health care (so many missed passage deadlines). That's what made the Olympics effort so demoralizing for this White House, it underscored the difficulty this president is having on closing the deal.
*** This Week's Agenda: Two issues will likely dominate the president's time and eat up a lion's share of the media's time: health care and Afghanistan. On health care, the president hopes to have a bill out of the Finance Committee by tomorrow. Sometime today, the Congressional Budget Office is expected to score the Baucus bill and the person who is most interested in the CBO analysis is GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe. But as important as Snowe is, don't overlook a liberal revolt on health care being hinted at by Democratic senators Wyden and Rockefeller. BTW, patience on health care is wearing thin with a LOT of rank-n-file senators; there's an exhaustion on the issue setting in. Oddly enough, some in the White House ranks believe the pressure on the president to get SOMETHING done, ANYTHING (as illustrated by the "SNL" skit) might actually help force a health care compromise. The president's only PUBLIC event today is about health care; he'll be appearing with a group of doctors, at least one from every state.
*** The Trickier Issue: As difficult as health care appears, the trickier issue for the White House is Afghanistan. This is the ultimate tea leaf reading test for those wondering what the new strategy will be. Over the weekend, NSA/Gen. Jones made a couple of things clear. 1)A troop increase is NOT inevitable. 2) Military commanders need to keep their recommendations a tad more private. As for where the president is leaning, it's clear this admin has more confidence in their ability to handle counter-terrorism exercises in places like Pakistan and Somalia and that could be something they highlight more and more in an attempt to downplay the need for Afghanistan nation-building. The admin wants to redefine the war in Afghanistan as a war against al Qaeda and emphasize that the Al Qaeda war is one that knows no borders and while Afghanistan's stability would be helpful in that war, it can't be relied on and, perhaps, is not something the U.S. can create or sustain. Bottom line: if you believe the Taliban and al Qaeda are one in the same, you're for more troops to Afghanistan. If you believe the Taliban is not a DIRECT national security threat to the U.S., you are probably leaning toward a more targeted strategy against al Qaeda.
*** Monday's Stray Thoughts: Obama is promising new initiatives to jump-start job creation, that's easy to say, hard to dictate in policy. ... Don't miss the continued hand-wringing many Congressional GOP leaders are doing over RNC Chair Michael Steele. Is Steele to the RNC and the DC GOP establishment what Howard Dean was to the DNC and the DC Dem establishment? Sure looks like it to us. ... So who is telling John Thune he needs to step up his profile if he's serious about a 2012 GOP run? In the span of a week, he's penned memos or op-eds on nuclear arms talks with Russia and the TARP. ... Sandra Day O'Connor's subtle shot at the Roberts court should become blogosphere catnip today.
*** Our First Senate Rankings: For the next few weeks, we're going to begin our first look at the 2010 political landscape. Today, we begin with the Senate. What a difference a few months can make -- as well as the end of a new administration's honeymoon. Earlier this year, especially after six GOP retirements (and probably seven when Kay Bailey Hutchison resigns in her bid for governor), Democrats seemed destined to pick up Senate seats for the third-straight cycle. That still could very well happen. But in First Read's first 2010 Senate rankings, the three most likely seats to change hands are Democratic ones. According to our rankings, the most vulnerable incumbents are three Democrats: Chris Dodd, Harry Reid, and appointed Michael Bennet.
*** The GOP's Weaknesses: Still, we can also see Dodd (in deep-blue Connecticut), Reid (without a top-tier challenger), and Bennet (ditto) pull these races out. In short, none is a Rick Santorum circa late '05/early '06, i.e. a dead candidate running. In addition, Republicans still have to deal with open seats in OH, MO, NH and KY -- where Democrats might hold a narrow ideological advantage or have close to a 50%-50% shot. Yet the Republicans' biggest weakness, at least as it stands right now, is how narrow its map is. So far, the GOP doesn't have someone to run against potentially vulnerable Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and it's still waiting to see if Mike Castle runs in Delaware and if John Hoeven challenges Byron Dorgan in North Dakota. What's more, Republicans don't even seem to be trying to land serious candidates in states where the GOP once had some success: Indiana (Evan Bayh's seat, though we have heard rumors of some recent NRSC polling), Oregon (Ron Wyden), Washington (Patty Murray), and Wisconsin (Russ Feingold). Remember, Democrats won back control of Congress, in part, because it picked up seats in places they were perceived as weak, namely the South (see Virginia '06 and North Carolina '08).
*** Our Top Ten: Below is our first Top-10 ranking for next year's Senate races (in terms of the likelihood of switching parties). Caveat: It's still very early in the cycle, and our future rankings will most definitely change.
1. CONNECTICUT (D): As long as incumbent Chris Dodd stays in the race, he will be the Democrats' most endangered incumbent. But will the GOP's increasingly crowded field, as well as the state's deep-blue tint, be enough for Dodd to pull this out? It's clearly enough to convince Dodd he can win; he continues to pushback against some Democrats who are trying to talk him into retirement.
2. NEVADA (D): Harry Reid's poll numbers are about as bad as Dodd's. But Reid doesn't have a potential challenger on par with someone like Rob Simmons out in Connecticut. Also, with the scandals affecting John Ensign and Jim Gibbons, the Nevada GOP is in a world of hurt. BTW, what would an Ensign resignation mean to this race? Gibbons is not someone who is predictable but if he were, it would likely mean Sen. Heller.
3. COLORADO (D): The news that state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff will challenge Michael Bennet moves this contest to our No. 3 spot. A primary is only going to move Bennet to the left in a battleground state where Democrats have enjoyed success by staying the middle. The question, like with Reid, is whether the GOP can find a top-tier candidate to challenge Bennet or Romanoff. BTW, right now, Democrats appear to be hurting more in Colorado than any other one-time Red State that they turned blue. (see Bill Ritter's poll numbers as well).
4. MISSOURI (R): You can flip a coin on these next three races, which are the Democrats' best pick-up opportunities. We put the Show Me State in this slot simply because -- right now -- Robin "solid brand name" Carnahan (D) seems like a slightly stronger candidate than Roy "DC baggage" Blunt (R), even in the sole battleground state McCain won last year.
5. NEW HAMPSHIRE (R): We rank the Granite State ahead of the Buckeye State below due to our rule about primaries -- if someone faces a primary, that puts them at a disadvantage. Bottom line right now: Paul Hodes is the sole Democrat running, while GOP establishment favorite Kelly Ayotte has a challenge from the right.
6. OHIO (R): Right now, Democrats Lee Fisher and Jennifer Brunner both lead likely GOP nominee Rob Portman in the polls. But could the Fisher-Brunner primary weaken the eventual Dem winner? If Brunner doesn't post a big fundraising number soon, could she be convinced to seek re-election as Sec/State instead? Possible.
7. ILLINOIS (D): Not only do Democrats have to deal with the Blago-Burris collateral damage, and not only did they fail to recruit their top candidate (Lisa Madigan), but now they have to contend with a primary between Alexi Giannoulias and Cheryle Robinson (and even David Hoffman. Unfortunately for Republicans, front-runner Mark Kirk (R) has to deal with a primary, too...
8. LOUISIANA (R): It might be just us, but we think incumbent David Vitter (R) could be in MORE trouble than the C.W. thinks. One, incumbents tend not to survive sex-scandal stories (see Tim Hutchinson in Arkansas). Two, Vitter has a very credible opponent in Charlie Melancon (D). The question for Melancon and Democrats is whether, post-Katrina, there are enough Democrats in the state to win a competitive contest.
9. PENNSYLVANIA (D): This race makes our Top 10 by virtue of our primary rule. While it's seems unlikely that the conservative Pat Toomey (R) can win in a state Obama won by 10 percentage points, the Specter-Sestak primary will only help him. Then there are the concerns about the 79-year-old Specter, who didn't look ready for a tough primary and general election in those town halls this past summer.
10. KENTUCKY (R): Now that vulnerable incumbent Jim Bunning won't run for another term, this race just barely makes our Top 10. National Democrats believe that Jack Conway (D) is their best candidate, but he'll first have to beat Dan Mongiardo in a increasingly bizarre primary. GOP front-runner Trey Grayson also faces a primary against Ron Paul's son, Rand.Â
ALSO: Races that bear watching: Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln running for re-election), North Carolina (Richard Burr running for re-election), Delaware (if Castle jumps in), North Dakota (if Hoeven runs), and Texas (once Hutchison resigns).
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 29 days Countdown to MA Special Primary: 64 days Countdown to MA Special Election: 106 days Countdown to Election Day 2010: 393 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails. Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone. Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.Â
There was a lot of tea leaf reading in statements made by National Security Adviser Jim Jones on the Sunday shows. USA Today on Jones' statements this weekend: "The top White House national security adviser on Sunday downplayed the need to send more troops to Afghanistan, where insurgent attacks in a remote area killed eight American soldiers over the weekend." More: "It would be, I think, unfortunate if we let the discussion just be about troop strength," Jones said on CBS. "The president should be presented with options, not just one fait accompli" about the course ahead.
On CNN, Jones pushed back against the top U.S. Commander in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal's public campaign for more troops, which included a speech Thursday to a London think tank. "Ideally, it's better for military advice to come up through the chain of command," Jones said.
The Washington Post led with Jones' apparent reprimand of General McCrystal and others for going public with their case for more troops.Â
The New York Times looks at the role General David Petraeus is playing in President Obama's war council versus the influence he had with President Bush. He's still a major voice, but not the dominating one. An interesting nugget: "Petraeus's advisers say that to preserve a sense of military impartiality, he has not voted since at least 2003, and that he is not sure if he is still registered in New Hampshire, where he and his wife own property."
More: "No longer does the man who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have one of the biggest voices at National Security Council meetings, as he did when Mr. Bush gave him 20 minutes during hour long weekly sessions to present his views in live video feeds from Baghdad. No longer is the general, with the Capitol Hill contacts and web of e-mail relationships throughout Washington's journalism establishment, testifying in media explosions before Congress, as he did in September 2007, when he gave 34 interviews in three days.
The change has fueled speculation in Washington about whether General Petraeus might seek the presidency in 2012. His advisers say that it is absurd — but in immediate policy terms, it means there is one less visible advocate for the military in the administration's debate over whether to send up to 40,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
General Petraeus's aides now privately call him "Dave the Dull," and say he has largely muzzled himself from the fierce public debate about the war to avoid antagonizing the White House, which does not want pressure from military superstars and is wary of the general's ambitions in particular."
Forget Petraeus for president in 2012, how about ex-Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf. Yup, he traveled to Iowa delivering the same message to the Des Moines Register editorial board he gave to the Washington Times last week: it's a bad idea for the U.S. to pull out of Afghanistan. "Musharraf spoke to Des Moines Register reporters and editors at the Clive home of a family friend, where he stopped for the day. The former Pakistani leader, who is a controversial figure at home and abroad, is on a speaking tour in the United States."
The headline may read: "8 U.S. soldiers killed in Taliban attack in Afghanistan" but read the details of this attack. Was it an attempt by the Taliban to score a cheap P.R. headline in the U.S. and the world as they knew the U.S. was going to be pulling out of rural parts of the country anyway?
Al Hunt's latest missive in Bloomberg helps explain the case for the smaller footprint approach in Afghanistan.
"Nearly two dozen House liberals have signed onto a bill introduced this past week that would prohibit an increase of troops in Afghanistan," The Hill reports. "A bill introduced by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) on Thursday would bar funding to increase the troop level in Afghanistan beyond its current level… 'Open-ended military intervention in Afghanistan is not in our national security interest and will only continue to give resonance to insurgent recruiters painting pictures of foreign occupation to a new generation,'" Lee is quoted as saying.
Peter W. Galbraith, who last week was fired from his position as the U.N.'s deputy special representative in Afghanistan, called the recent presidential elections there "a foreseeable train wreck," and shed light on his being fired, in a Washington Post op-ed yesterday. Galbriath writes that "as many as 30 percent of Karzai's votes were fraudulent, and lesser fraud was committed on behalf of other candidates. In several provinces, including Kandahar, four to 10 times as many votes were recorded as voters actually cast." On his reasons for being let go from the U.N., Galbraith writes, "For weeks, [U.N. Special Representative Kai] Eide had been denying or playing down the fraud in Afghanistan's recent presidential election, telling me he was concerned that even discussing the fraud might inflame tensions in the country. But in my view, the fraud was a fact that the United Nations had to acknowledge or risk losing its credibility with the many Afghans who did not support President Hamid Karzai."
George Will sums up his take on President Obama's two major foreign policy challenges: "Regarding Afghanistan, President Obama might believe he can effect a Houdini-like escape, uninjured, from the box his words have built. Regarding Iran, he seems to believe that its leaders can be talked or coerced (by economic sanctions) out of their long, costly pursuit of nuclear weapons by convincing them that such weapons do not serve Iran's "security."
Writing in the New York Times, James Traub weighs the differences between conflict with an enemy--like Russia during the cold war--and an ideology like Communism and religious extremism: "The question now is whether "containment" is also the right metaphor for Afghanistan, and for the threat of Islamic extremism...Al Qaeda, and jihadism generally, is a global force that seeks control of territory chiefly as a means to carry out its global strategy. It has no borders at which to be checked; its success or failure is measured in ideological rather than territorial terms — like Communism without Russia. Mr. Kennan often suggested that America's own example of democratic prosperity was one of its most powerful weapons during the cold war; and plainly that is so today as well."
Iran has agreed to allow inspectors into their secret nuclear facility on October 2. It's probably the latest date they could have agreed to without looking like to the rest of the world they were trying to delay things but many will ask, why are inspectors waiting 20 days? What can the Iranians hide in three weeks?
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran's cooperation with the IAEA had left no "vagueness" about its nuclear work. 'There are no ambiguous issues remaining because of Iran's good cooperation with the agency,' Ahmadinejad said in a meeting with ElBaradei, state radio reported."
On Saturday, an International Atomic Energy Agency report concluded that Iran has "sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable" atom bomb, the New York Times reported. The report is at odds with an earlier study done in 2007, which said that Iran stopped trying to develop nuclear weapons in 2003. Titled "'Possible Military Dimensions of Iran's Nuclear Program'… [The report] draws a picture of a complex program, run by Iran's Ministry of Defense, "aimed at the development of a nuclear payload to be delivered using the Shahab 3 missile system," Iran's medium-range missile, which can strike the Middle East and parts of Europe."
On Meet The Press, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said "the U.S. had three options: to push sanctions through the U.N.; work with European allies to punish Iran; or to take unilateral action in conjunction with the other possible courses of action." And on Fox News Sunday, there was some bipartisan agreement on dealing with the country. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) said the U.S. "cannot allow talking and negotiation to replace strong action if we feel we have to take that step." Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Congress should pass measures to "empower the president and our country to be tough and to put some actions behind words. So let's have 'Iran Week' in the Senate and get something done."
Graham added "if sanctions fail and a military route is necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, the United States -- not Israel -- should lead the effort. Graham said that such an attack should not only target nuclear facilities."
The Los Angeles Times reports that President Obama is quietly trying to shore up support for some form of a public option. "In the last week, however, senior administration officials have been holding private meetings almost daily at the Capitol with senior Democratic staff to discuss ways to include a version of the public plan in the healthcare bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) plans to bring to the Senate floor this month, according to senior Democratic congressional aides. Among those regularly in the meetings are Obama's top healthcare advisor, Nancy-Ann DeParle; aides to Reid; and staff from the Senate Finance and Health committees, both of which developed healthcare bills."
Previously, the Obama administration has relied on a bipartisan group of governors to support his various legislative initiatives; but on health care (in particular Medicaid), he could find bipartisan opposition as state governments worry about how to pay for an expansion of Medicaid.
Meanwhile, despite assurances from Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus that he had the votes to pass his bill in the committee two Democrats are support from the final product, Rockefeller and Wyden. Both Democrats had amendments defeated or withdrawn during the markup process.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is on the spot with health care; it's perhaps the biggest test of his tenure as Leader. "Any one change could lose a senator, and losing even one could be fatal. Move too far to the left and a moderate Democrat like Ben Nelson of Nebraska could rebel. Too far to the right, and a liberal like Ron Wyden of Oregon could be alienated. And then there's perhaps the most important senator of all, Olympia Snowe of Maine, virtually the only Republican seen as a possible "yes" vote on the health care bill. Reid will need to bring her along every step of the way."
Baucus and Reid are "approaching a breaking point" over inclusion of the public option in a final Senate proposal. While Reid "deferred the issue" to Baucus over the summer, the leader indicated last week "that he is prepared to join Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), who both pushed a public option amendment that failed in a committee vote last Tuesday."
Reid and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), also a strong supporter of the public option, indicated that in order to attract centrist Democrats wary of the public option, that they would be open to "[wrapping] the controversial elements of reform in a politically attractive message to the centrists' conservative-leaning constituents. That could include the addition of provisions aimed directly at problems or issues in each Senator's state, such as tweaks to state funding formulas for federal programs, aides said."
Despite Congressional Democrats' overall support of a government-run health insurance program, they are "are deeply divided about the policy and politics of the public option." Citing proposals from Senators Kent Conrad (D-ND), Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Tom Carper, (D-DE), The Hill writes," they're going to have to figure something out. President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, all of whom support the public option, cannot afford to brush aside the liberals who compose the majority of their party. But the centrists represent a crucial voting bloc in the House and a handful of much-needed votes in the Senate."
Roll Call compares the current Republican strategy to combat the Obama administration's initiatives to that of the GOP in 1994. "Republicans faced a popular Democratic president pursuing a series of high-profile legislative reforms. And in both cases, Republicans used a combination of substantive policy critiques and short-lived scandals — such as 1993's Travelgate or this year's dust-up over "green jobs czar" Van Jones — to try to weaken Democrats. And, both then and now, health care reform has been at the center of the debate…Republicans and Democrats alike said the similarities are largely a result of how the two parties are hard-wired — with Democrats better-suited for targeted, focused fights while Republicans thrive in an open warfare situation."
Jump to October 2009 archive page: 1 ... 910111213
E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
