From NBC's Mark Murray
... the more they stay the same, we guess.

As it turns out, a controversy over a president giving an education speech to students isn't new.

One, George H.W. Bush gave a speech to students back in 1991. And two, Democrats criticized him for it.

From the Washington Post on Oct. 4, 1991 (hat tip to KY3 and our friends at Hotline):

White House press secretary Marlin Fitzwater came armed to the lectern top yesterday to rebut complaints that the president used taxpayer money for a political event to promote himself as the education president.

Democrats are complaining that the $26,750 paid by the Education Department to a private media firm to produce television coverage of Bush's speech to students on education Tuesday was improperly used. The television performance was broadcast live by CNN and other stations around the nation could pick it up by satellite.

Not that the White House is sensitive about the issue, but Fitzwater said that if the White House instead had sent a letter to only 86,000 of the nation's 4.6 million schoolchildren, it would have cost more. The TV show was just another way to get the president's message out, Fitzwater said, and cynical journalists should get with the new technology.

Wouldn't the film make good campaign commercials, Fitzwater was asked. "We certainly would use any tape of the president, doing anything, anywhere in the world at any time if it was to his political benefit," Fitzwater agreed.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Obama's big stage: By choosing such a large setting for his health-care speech on Wednesday -- a primetime joint address of Congress -- there's no doubt that the White House is heeding the call of Democrats to own the issue like never before. "It's always been the case that the president wanted to drive this debate, lay out some principles, challenge the Congress to respond to them," White House senior adviser David Axelrod told one of us in an interview yesterday. "Now they have… Now it's time to draw those strands together and … take those final steps so we can provide that stability and security for people who have insurance and help those who cant get coverage they can afford." Yet as Republicans reminded us yesterday, Bill Clinton gave a joint address to Congress on health care back in Sept. 1993, and that didn't turn out so well for the Democrats. This is the last P.R. arrow in the White House's proverbial quiver. Said House Minority Leader John Boehner yesterday, "House Republicans want to hear what the President has to say, but after the public outcry this August, it's clear the American people don't want a new speech, they want a new plan."

*** A house divided: The joint session, of course, will likely feature one side of the chamber -- the Democrats -- constantly applauding President Obama's speech, and another side -- the Republicans -- sitting on their hands. Indeed, the president's true audience for this joint session probably isn't most Republicans, who have been unwilling so far to work with the White House. Nor is his real audience the American public, which is increasingly skeptical about the legislation emerging from Congress. Rather, the folks whom Obama really be will addressing on Wednesday are the Democratic senators and members of Congress, plus Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Those are the true players in this debate who will decide the fate of the health-care legislation. Some critics, like Boehner, are now telling the White House to start over and hit the reset button. But for Obama, the quicker he can pass something in his rear-view mirror, the quicker he can turn to other issues. It may be too late to use the health-care debate to fix his political problems. So the hope with the White House is that passing something -- ANYTHING -- will give the president a small boost, and then he can begin the real repairs with the political middle post-health care.

*** Whither the public option? Also in the interview with Axelrod, he refused to draw any lines in the sand on the public option. "The president embraced a public option as part of this pool for uninsured Americans and small businesses as a way of promoting competition with private insurance companies to get them the best possible deal," Axelrod said. "He still believes in that competition and choice and will be promoting that idea." After a follow-up question, he added, "The idea of competition and choice is a very important part of his plan. Look, Chuck, if I gave you all details of the plan, then why would he have to make a speech?"

*** Strange bedfellows: The New York Times makes this striking point on its front-page: that Republican support has become vital to President Obama when it comes to the war in Afghanistan. Question: How many more Republicans, if they stick by the president on Afghanistan, will echo Lindsey Graham's call here? "The president needs to be more aggressive about taking ownership of this strategy, and reinforcing to this country the consequences of Afghanistan being lost and becoming a safe haven for Al Qaeda," Mr. Graham said. More: "One danger for Mr. Obama is that he may be forced to abandon his own party on Afghanistan for the right, which could put him in a perilous position if Republicans at any point decide they do not want to support a Democratic president on the issue. 'Some people on the right think Afghanistan is hopeless, some people think this is Obama's war and want to do to Obama the same thing the left did to Bush with Iraq,' Mr. Graham said."

*** Kennedy's memoir: The New York Times also reports on an advanced copy of Ted Kennedy's memoirs, in which the late senator "called his behavior after the 1969 car accident that killed Mary Jo Kopechne 'inexcusable' and said the events might have shortened the life of his ailing father, Joseph P. Kennedy." Per NBC's Andrea Mitchell, Kennedy's publisher is refusing to advance the Sept. 14 publication date and issued this statement about the New York Times' article: "We regret that the New York Times did not respect the September 14th release date of TRUE COMPASS, which was carefully coordinated with the Senator's family." A Kennedy source added to Mitchell, "The NYT, based on a hasty read, has missed the core of the book and much of the news in it. Their coverage comes from about 15 pages of a 500 page book. It is a family story. A story of tragedy. A story of persistence. A story of love. The story of 70 years of American history. An American story. It is a book to be read, not to be summarized."    

*** Hey! Obama! leave them kids alone: You know American politics has perhaps sunk to a new low in polarization when a president's upcoming speech on education and personal responsibility gets criticized by Republicans for being a "socialist" power grab. That's what happened when Florida GOP Chairman Jim Greer issued this statement about Obama speech, which the Education Department has encouraged students to watch: "As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology." One could maybe find question with the wording (and perhaps wisdom) of the recommended lesson plans the Education Department has built around the speech, and the administration has since revised the most controversial language in them. But is the Florida GOP really suggesting here that a speech on education and personal responsibility -- a term that some politicians may have forgotten over the past few years -- is a bad thing?

*** The administration's stimulus blitz: Over the past few weeks, the political debate over the stimulus has taken a backseat to other issues -- health care, Afghanistan, those CIA interrogations. But the stimulus, along with Vice President Biden, returns to the spotlight when he delivers a speech on the Recovery Act at the Brookings Institution at 10:00 am ET. The White House also is dispatching its cabinet secretaries to talk up the stimulus -- Ken Salazar to Arkansas, Tom Vilsack to Virginia, Ray LaHood to Chicago, and Arne Duncan to California.

Countdown to Election Day 2009: 61 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 425 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 White House announced yesterday that President Obama would deliver a primetime joint address to Congress on Wednesday. The topic: health care. "Scheduling of the speech next Wednesday night, just a day after lawmakers return from their August recess, underscores the determination of the White House to confront critics of Obama's overhaul proposals and to buck up supporters who have been thrown on the defensive," the AP says. "Allies have been urging the president to be more specific about his plans and to take a greater role in the debate, and aides have signaled he will do that in the address to a joint session of Congress in the House chamber." 

The Washington Post adds that Obama "is not expected to associate himself with any one bill, but a senior administration official said the president's goal is to be 'much more prescriptive' than he has been, mapping out ways to merge proposals and 'move Congress toward one single solution.'" 

The New York Times: "By signaling that they would seek to revise existing versions of legislation moving through the House and Senate, administration officials and Democratic leaders in Congress -- many of whom had said earlier in the summer that they saw no need to scale back their ambitions -- made clear that their political calculations had changed. With Congressional Republicans standing almost unanimously in opposition to the Democratic approach, the target now for Mr. Obama is primarily a handful of moderate Democrats and the one Republican who seems open to a deal, Senator Olympia J. Snowe of Maine."   

Politico calls the speech "his riskiest effort to date -- a high-reward gamble with significant potential downsides."   

The Los Angeles Times' headline: "Obama's big gamble on healthcare debate."

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein reports that the White House has broken into two factions in how to proceed on health care. "The first camp could be called 'universal-lite.' They're focused on preserving the basic shape of the bill. They think a universal plan is necessary for a number of reasons: For one thing, the insurance market regulations don't work without universality, as you can't really ask insurers to offer standard prices if the healthy and the young don't have to enter the system. For another, it will be easier to change subsidies or improve the benefit package down the road if the initial offerings prove inadequate… This camp seems to be largely headed by the policy people."

"The second camp is not universal at all. This camp believes the bill needs to be scaled back sharply in order to ensure passage. Covering 20 million people isn't as good as covering 40 million people, but it's a whole lot better than letting the bill fall apart and covering no one at all. It's also a success of some sort, and it gives you something to build on. What that sacrifices in terms of structure it gains in terms of political appeal. This camp is largely headed by members of the political team."

Writes Joe Klein in the latest issue of Time magazine: "The mistakes Obama has made are rookie mistakes that can be corrected. And the general tendency of his Administration -- toward civility, as opposed to the ugliness we've seen in the past month -- is the right one. But he can't allow his desire for civility to neuter the requirements of leadership. He has to lead, clearly and decisively, starting right now."

Time's Tumulty looks at the role Chuck Grassley has played in the debate.

Regarding Vice President Biden's speech on the stimulus today, "Nearly 200 days into the effort, Biden says it is more effective 'than we had hoped.' Biden's upbeat report card, to be delivered Thursday in a speech at the Brookings Institution, comes as economists say the country is slowly breaking free of the most crippling recession in decades." More: "Recovery act dollars are going farther and working harder than we anticipated," Biden said in excerpts released in advance by his office… Biden is up against a wary audience when he says 'the recovery act is doing more, faster, more efficiently and more effectively than we had hoped… One of the criticisms of the recovery act is that it is simply a grab bag of different programs. But the fact that the recovery act is multifaceted doesn't reflect a lack of design. It is the design. Our economy is so complex and so wounded that reinvigorating one segment alone -- or using one tool alone -- would never do all that needs to be done… Our goal is not just to emerge from the recession. We will. That's not enough. We must emerge stronger than we were before we entered it.'"

But this Boston Globe headline doesn't help the administration: "Stimulus work sends cash flowing out of US." "As local governments race to spend stimulus money, many are seeking exemptions from the law's 'Buy American' restrictions, which were intended to prevent taxpayer money from ending up in foreign pockets," the paper writes. "The administration has granted waivers for goods as varied as steel for public housing projects, high-speed Internet equipment, and Auburn's manhole covers, which have heavy-duty hinges to help withstand the town's heavy truck traffic. The Obama administration could not provide a list or amount of waivers granted -- which potentially could total billions of dollars -- and Vice President Joe Biden's office, which has responsibility for overseeing the stimulus, did not respond to requests for comment."

The Hill does its "Rich List." John Kerry (D-MA), Darrell Issa (R-NJ) and Jane Harman (D-CA), it says, are the richest members of Congress. The top 10 by net worth in the millions: 1) Kerry $167.8, 2) Issa: $164.7, 3) Harman: $112.2, 4) Jay Rockefeller (D-WV): $80.4, 5) Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO): $71.2, 6) Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL): $50.2, 7) Rep. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): $43.6, 8) Rep. Harry Teague (D-NM): $40.3, 9) Rep. Mike McCaul (R-TX): $38.2, 10) Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL): $31. (Here's the full list.)

The DCCC has a new Web video that highlights some of the comments that Republicans and conservatives like Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Steele have made about health care. "Since Congressional Republicans and their right wing allies can't win with the facts on health care, they've resorted to using fear, fiction, and scare tactics of the worst kind to shamelessly try and 'kill' health insurance reform," DCCC spokesman Ryan Rudominer says. "This new Web video is just another way that we are exposing their lies and over-the-top rhetoric while empowering our grassroots supporters to hold them accountable for trying to deny families quality, affordable health care."

NEW HAMPSHIRE: A new poll shows that GOP challenger Frank Guinta has pulled within the margin of error against incumbent Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D).

NEW JERSEY: The campaign for Republican gubernatorial nominee Chris Christie released a mostly positive ad yesterday, with supporters calling him a "leader" and "independent." The ad also plays up Christie's "bipartisan" record, saying that as U.S. Attorney he put both Democrats and Republicans behind bars.  
 
The final schedule for the gubernatorial candidates' debates: Oct. 1 and  Oct. 16 will feature Christie, Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine and Independent Chris Daggett. On Oct. 8, the candidates for lieutenant governor, Republican Kim Guadagno, Democrat Loretta Weinberg and Independent Frank Esposito will debate. 

PENNSYLVANIA: Beer Summit 2? Joe Sestak and Pat Toomey will have beers together tonight -- after their joint health-care town hall on Wednesday.  Once again, Arlen Specter won't be attending.

VIRGINIA: Creigh Deeds made his first public comments about Bob McDonnell's controversial masters' thesis yesterday, saying that it "explains the social agenda that has apparently driven his legislative agenda during the years… He wasn't 20 years old when he wrote it. He was 34," Deeds said. "Thomas Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration of Independence… it's relevant." 

The Democratic National Committee is giving $5 million to the Virginia governor's race, as it did when former governor and DNC chairman Tim Kaine ran for the post in 2005. Some will go directly to the Democratic nominee Creigh Deeds, and some will go to the state party. 

From NBC's Athena Jones
President Obama will address a joint session of Congress on Wednesday, Sept. 9th.

The White House is still deciding what time the speech will take place, but it will be in prime time.

Might this be the big health-care speech?

From NBC's Pete Williams
What does it mean that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has hired only one law clerk for the term that begins next year, in the fall of 2010?

It's the clearest indication yet that he's seriously considering retirement, say those familiar with his hiring. But there's no sign yet that he has actually made the decision -- or if he has, that he's told anyone about it.

For at least the past three years, Stevens has told the clerks he has hired that he might retire and therefore couldn't promise them the full term of the clerkship. So far, of course, that caveat has proven unnecessary.

Associate justices are allowed up to four clerks, and he has hired the full complement for the coming term which begins next month. By hiring just one for the term that begins in 2010, he leaves himself the option of either retiring with only one clerk to disappoint or going ahead and hiring the remaining three in the coming months.

In any event, it's no secret that Stevens is likely the court's next retirement. He's 89, and though he is in good health and remains a vigorous member of the court, the odds have always been good that President Obama, in his first term, would be nominating a Stevens successor.

From NBC's Mark Murray
The Republican Party is really trying to box in Speaker Nancy Pelosi regarding the ethics investigation into Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. As NBC's Lisa Myers reported, Pelosi and Dem leaders aren't going to make any decision about Rangel's chairmanship until the Ethics Committee has finished its investigation.

"After numerous empty campaign promises to 'drain the swamp' of ethical misconduct in Washington, Nancy Pelosi continues go back on her word and endorse a tax cheat who has effectively become the Bernie Madoff of the United States Congress," said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Ken Spain. "In the midst of a severe recession combined with budget deficits that have reached astronomical levels, one would think Democrats would be calling for the removal of tax-cheat Charlie Rangel from his perch atop the powerful Ways and Means Committee. If the head of the tax-writing committee cannot manage his own finances, how serious can Democrats possibly be about keeping the nation's fiscal house in order? By the looks of the federal balance sheet, they aren't."

From NBC's Mark Murray
This coming Tuesday, President Obama is set to deliver a speech on education and its importance to students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, VA.

The speech also will be broadcast on the White House's Web site, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan has encouraged principals across the country to have their students tune in.

Yet somehow, the chairman of the Florida Republican Party, Jim Greer, believes Obama's speech as a platform "to spread" his "socialist ideology."

Says Greer: "As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology. The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the President justify his plans for government-run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other President, is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power."

More: "While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American President and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda. The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates."

Has the state of our political discourse devolved to the point where a president's speech about the importance of education gets called a socialist power grab?

*** UPDATE *** We just spoke with Florida Republican Party spokeswoman Katie Gordon, who said that Greer's concern is the recommended lesson plan from Education Secretary Arne Duncan. One example for pre-K to 6th graders: "As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following: What is the President trying to tell me? What is the President asking me to do? What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?"

Gordon tells First Read that the Florida GOP believes that students should be taught to respect the office of the presidency. Its beef, she said, is that parents should be able to decide whether their children should be allowed to participate in this kind of discussion.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Retired Red Sox ace Curt Schilling is apparently "not ruling out" (classic) a run to replace Ted Kennedy, according to the New England Cable Network's Twitter page.

NECN's Tweet from about 1:30 pm ET: 

Curt Schilling tells NECN's Brad Puffer that he's not ruling out a possible run for the Senate seat left vacant by the death of Ted Kennedy.

*** UPDATE *** Here's the audio

*** UPDATE 2 *** After listening to the audio, it doesn't sound like Schilling is really considering running: "As of today, probably not," Schilling said by phone after being asked if he's considering running for the seat. "I don't know going forward ... that's a pretty big deal. Right now, I'm not going to speculate ... I have to make a decision pretty quickly."

From NBC's Libby Leist
NBC News has learned that the State Department Inspector's General office will be sending a team of more than a dozen inspectors to the U.S. Embassy in Kabul in the coming weeks to conduct a "full inspection" of embassy operations, according to a spokesman for the Inspector General's office.

The inspectors will "evaluate all aspects of the embassy and the mission," spokesman Tom Burgess said.

State Department officials say the inspectors will be looking at the allegations against ArmorGroup revealed by a watchdog group yesterday as well as all embassy operations including diplomatic, consular and security activity.

The IG's office has previously conducted inspections of the U.S. Embassy in Kabul in 2004 and 2006 and officials insist that the ArmorGroup revelations did not trigger this latest inspection.

Separately, the State Department IG's office has opened an investigation into the ArmorGroup contract. The Project on Government Oversight, or POGO, revealed explicit photos and videos yesterday of alleged hazing by ArmorGroup guards at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul and accused the company of failure to provide proper equipment to protect the embassy, overworked guards, guard shortages, a lack of English-speaking guards, bringing prostitutes on base and supervisors engaging in missions they are not trained for.

POGO's report faults the State Department for "grossly deficient" oversight and management of security contractors hired to protect the embassy in Kabul and it warns of "a significant threat to the security of the Embassy and its personnel" because of the contractor problems. 

From NBC's Mark Murray
Levi Johnston, the father of Sarah Palin's grandson, dishes out on the Palins in the latest issue of Vanity Fair.

On the kind of parents Sarah and Todd were:

The Palin house was much different from what many people expect of a normal family, even before she was nominated for vice president. There wasn't much parenting in that house. Sarah doesn't cook, Todd doesn't cook—the kids would do it all themselves: cook, clean, do the laundry, and get ready for school. Most of the time Bristol would help her youngest sister with her homework, and I'd barbecue chicken or steak on the grill.

On alleging that Palin wanted to adopt Bristol's baby:

Sarah told me she had a great idea: we would keep it a secret—nobody would know that Bristol was pregnant. She told me that once Bristol had the baby she and Todd would adopt him. That way, she said, Bristol and I didn't have to worry about anything. Sarah kept mentioning this plan. She was nagging—she wouldn't give up. She would say, "So, are you gonna let me adopt him?" We both kept telling her we were definitely not going to let her adopt the baby. I think Sarah wanted to make Bristol look good, and she didn't want people to know that her 17-year-old daughter was going to have a kid.

On Palin after the campaign:

Sarah was sad for a while. She walked around the house pouting. I had assumed she was going to go back to her job as governor, but a week or two after she got back she started talking about how nice it would be to quit and write a book or do a show and make "triple the money." It was, to her, "not as hard." She would blatantly say, "I want to just take this money and quit being governor." She started to say it frequently, but she didn't know how to do it. When she came home from work, it seemed like she was more and more stressed out.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Retooling time: Just askin', but what would be the bigger news today -- if President Obama was re-vamping his health-care pitch or if he decided NOT to re-vamp it? Well, multiple outlets today are reporting about the health-care retool. Politico says that the White House "is putting the final touches" on a new health-care strategy, which will include detailing his health-care demands from Congress in a speech as soon as next week and which won't insist on the so-called public insurance option. However, the White House pushes back a bit against the story, saying it just one of the options being considered. That said, senior White House adviser David Axelrod tells the AP that it's beginning to be time for the White House to put everything together. "The ideas are all there on the table," he said. "Now we are in a new phase, and it's time to pull the strands of these together." By the way, look at the post-Labor Day schedule: It's pretty clear the White House has to do something on health care in first 10 days after Labor Day, because the rest of the month is dominated by the economy, 9/11 anniversary (translation: Afghanistan), UN General Assembly, and the G20. and

*** Debating the public option: That the White House might not be insisting on a public option shouldn't be big news to anyone who has been following the debate over the past few months. Of course, the news is likely to enrage the left. Yesterday, the man who likely will be the new AFL-CIO president, Richard Trumka, said the labor group won't support any legislation that doesn't contain the public option. (Obama, it turns out, addresses two AFL-CIO audiences in the next two weeks, at their Labor Day picnic in Cincinnati and then in Pittsburgh on Sept. 15.) And tonight, progressive groups like MoveOn are sponsoring vigils across the country demanding the government/public option. But we've asked this question before and we'll ask it again: Why did the left make this the centerpiece of any reform -- more important than insuring more Americans, establishing an insurance exchange, and preventing insurers from denying coverage to those with pre-existing health conditions? In other words, is the left really going to walk from any health-care legislation that does those things but that doesn't contain a public option? Also, why hasn't there been a greater debate over the phrase "public option" -- is it really an obvious description of what those who are for it are advocating? If they had given it another name (say "expanded Medicare"), would it have changed the debate a bit and kept seniors from feeling so concerned?

*** Change you can believe in? As Nicholas Lemann writes in the New Yorker, "If a health-care bill passes this fall, it will be full of compromises: departures from liberal ideals, and fudges about how much it will cost. But anybody who stops fighting for it now is going to spend years repenting. As long as Congress passes, and Obama signs, a law that embodies the principle of universal, government-guaranteed coverage, the country will have achieved an enormous, and previously elusive, advance. Reagan nailed it in 1961: medical care is a core element in the liberal social compact." South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, a Blue Dog, also sums up the polling we've seen on health care, maybe without realizing it: "I want to support necessary change," she said. "But I don't want to support radical change." The real lesson, some say, of the Ted Kennedy legacy? His regret for not taking the health-care deal he could have cut with Richard Nixon in the early '70s.

*** Selling Afghanistan: But if the White House thought selling health care was hard, selling staying in Afghanistan might be harder. Just look at the array of stories TODAY. The New York Times: "Tribal Leaders Say Karzai's Team Forged 23,900 Votes." Another Times headline: "U.N. Sees Afghan Drug Cartels Emerging." The Washington Post: "Taliban is much stronger than the insurgency the U.S. military faced in Iraq." And the Los Angeles Times: "First the votes, now the complaints pile up in Afghanistan."  

*** They've done studies, you know -- 50% of the time, it works every time: As of yesterday, President Obama's approval rating in the Gallup daily tracking poll was 52%, which is close to the 51% in our NBC poll from last month. As Gallup has noted, if Obama falls below 50% in his eighth month on the job, it will be the third-fastest drop below that mark for a new president since World War II. Gerald Ford fell below 50% in his third month, Bill Clinton in his fourth month, Ronald Reagan in his 10th month, Jimmy Carter in his 13th month, Richard Nixon in his 25th month, LBJ in his 29th month, Bush 41 in his 36th month, Bush 43 in his 37th month, and Eisenhower in his 63rd month. Note: Kennedy never fell below 50% before he was assassinated, and George W. Bush was approaching that mark right before the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A few things to remember about all the analysis folks will see on polls in the coming days: There are more BAD polls now than ever before; it confuses the issue and lets some folks cherry-pick what they want. The VERY erratic robo-polling firms have added to the confusion like never before.

*** Obama has him where he wants them? This data above tell us a few things. One, Obama has had a rapid drop and that doesn't help his prospects for things like health-care reform. Two, the most recent presidents -- Reagan, Clinton, and Bush 43 (right before 9/11) -- have experienced similar drops, suggesting an increased political polarization over the past 20 or so years. Three, taking George W. Bush out of the equation due to 9/11, every president who has ended up winning re-election since 1980 saw his approval rating drop below 50% in his first year. Moral of the story: If your goal is to get re-elected, it's better to have your political struggles early (Clinton, Reagan) rather than later (Bush 41). Kind of like a college football season, right? Better to lose early, than late. So be careful what you read into what Obama's approval rating right now means for his presidency. There's really no correlation between how quickly a president's poll numbers drop and the overall success of his presidency.

*** GOP recruiting and 2010: But here's another byproduct of Obama's declining poll numbers: It's encouraging some Republicans -- who might not have run for office in 2006, 2008, or even three months ago -- from seriously thinking about running for the Senate or House in 2010. Yesterday, we learned that state Sen. Gilbert Baker (R) is going to challenge Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) down in Arkansas. While Lincoln still has be considered the favorite here, and while Baker has a crowded GOP primary to deal with first, it is clear that Republicans are recruiting better candidates than they have in quite some time. Recruiting success in politics doesn't guarantee you'll win the race, but it gives you the opportunity to win. One other sign to watch for in the next few months: If the declining Obama ratings push any DEMOCRATS into retirement. For the GOP, the big difference between now and this point in the '94 cycle is the lack of open-seat opportunities caused by Democratic retirements. Republicans made a lot of their gains in '94 due to retirement, not knocking off incumbents.

*** Another SCOTUS opening next year? According to the AP, "Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has hired fewer law clerks than usual, generating speculation that the leader of the court's liberals will retire next year. If Stevens does step down, he would give President Barack Obama his second high court opening in two years. Obama chose Justice Sonia Sotomayor for the court when Justice David Souter announced his retirement in May." Stevens is 89.

*** Sestak vs. Toomey: Let's debate -- well, kind of. There will be a debate in the Pennsylvania Senate race WITHOUT Arlen Specter. Rep. Joe Sestak (D) will take on former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) at Muhlenberg College at 6:15 pm ET. The topic: health care.

*** More on Rangel: On TODAY this morning, NBC's Lisa Myers asked this question: How did chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, Charlie Rangel (D), forget to disclose more than $600,000 in assets and thousands of dollars in income? Myers reported that, per Democratic sources, Speaker Pelosi and the Dem leadership have agreed not to make any decision about Rangel's chairmanship until the investigation is complete. The Ethics Committee is taking a long time, sources tell us, because Rangel's finances are THAT complicated and that, well, messed up. A big factor working in Rangel's favor, though: The next in line for the chairmanship of Ways and Means is Pete Stark, who is, shall we say, a "controversial" old-school liberal. Notice how few House Republicans actually are taking the opportunity to criticize Rangel.

*** Beam me up outta here: Finally, former Rep. Jim Traficant (D) will be released from prison today -- after serving seven years for bribery and other charges. The former Ohio congressman's release will be honored at the local minor league baseball team's game that night in Youngstown, complete with a video of his career on the JumboTron. There will even be a dinner in his honor on Sunday. "We need to tell this guy: 'We still love you, Jim,'" said Linda Kovachik of Boardman, who was an aide in the 17th District congressman's Boardman and Youngstown offices. 

Countdown to Election Day 2009: 62 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 426 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.

"Faced with falling approval ratings and increasingly impatient with Senate negotiations, Obama is considering a speech in the next week or so in which he would be "more prescriptive" about what he feels Congress must include in a health bill, top adviser David Axelrod said Tuesday in an interview," the AP writes. "The speech might occur before the Sept. 15 deadline the White House gave Senate negotiators to seek a bipartisan bill, Axelrod said. He suggested that two key Republicans have not bargained in good faith."

The New York Times interviews some Blue Dog Dems who are speaking positively about passing something major, but the details of what they want are thin.

The Los Angeles Times delves into the fact that red states, home to some of the strongest opposition to health care, could benefit the most from the president's reform efforts.

Dan Balz on the president's push for health care: "But if they hoped that August would significantly strengthen their hand for the long-awaited fall battles, they must be disappointed. The task looks as difficult today as it did when Congress left, if not more difficult. They could use some help. Whatever happened to that reset button that Secretary of State Clinton gave to the Russians?"

"President Obama's job approval rating is at the lowest point in his presidency -- a drop largely caused by erosion in support among the political independents who gave him an electoral landslide, a new poll suggests. The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey results released late this afternoon show his overall approval number at 53 percent, down from 76 percent in early February, just after he took office. The increasingly bitter partisanship, particularly on health care, appears to be taking a toll on the president. While his approval number among fellow Democrats rose slightly to 90 percent from July, it fell to 43 percent from 53 percent among independents and to 15 percent from 23 percent among Republicans. It's the first time in a CNN poll that a majority of independents gave a thumbs down to Obama." 

The Wall Street Journal weighs the impact the stimulus is having on the improving economy. "Government efforts to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars into the U.S. economy appear to be helping the U.S. climb out of the worst recession in decades. But there's little agreement about which programs are having the biggest impact. Some economists argue that efforts such as the Federal Reserve's aggressive buying of Treasury debt and mortgage-backed securities, as well as government efforts to shore up banks, are providing a bigger boost than the administration's $787 billion stimulus package."

More: "Much of the stimulus spending is just beginning to trickle through the economy, with spending expected to peak sometime later this year or in early 2010. The government has funneled about $60 billion of the $288 billion in promised tax cuts to U.S. households, while about $84 billion of the $499 billion in spending has been paid. About $200 billion has been promised to certain projects, such as infrastructure and energy projects. Economists say the money out the door -- combined with the expectation of additional funds flowing soon -- is fueling growth above where it would have been without any government action."

Meanwhile, "Iran's top nuclear negotiator said Tuesday that the country is ready to reopen talks with world powers increasingly concerned about Iranian intentions, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency."

The fact they did their response on state-run TV may mean they feel some heat at home in the post-election climate.

And: "Secretary of State Clinton ordered an investigation on Tuesday into the Animal House revels of private guards at the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan - including booze, hookers and other 'deviant behavior.' The investigation by the State Department's inspector general follows a shocking report to Clinton by the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight detailing a 'Lord of the Flies environment' at the Camp Sullivan compound a few miles from the embassy in Kabul. Prostitutes allegedly were brought in for birthday parties, drunken guards engaged in brawls and boozy lawn parties turned into naked affairs where guests urinated on one another, according to photos and videos obtained by the nonprofit group."

"Growing ethics turmoil surrounding Rangel has prompted calls for Pelosi to yank Rangel's gavel," The Hill reports. "But Democratic aides say that Pelosi will not pressure Rangel to resign his post or censure him publicly unless the House ethics committee finds him guilty of misconduct or a prosecutor brings forth charges." Her reasons for not stepping in: She doesn't want to step on the ethics committee's investigation and she "does not want to set the precedent of penalizing a colleague because of transgressions alleged in media reports."

USA Today looks at the role lobbyists are playing in the health-care debate. "In the first six months of the year, health care interests donated $19.7 million to all federal lawmakers. More than 40% — $8.1 million — went to the campaign and political action committees of lawmakers on the five House and Senate committees that are working on health care. Craig Holman, of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the giving allows health care lobbyists 'to get one-on-one time with officeholders' as lawmakers craft legislation."

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer faced one rowdy town hall yesterday. Per The Hill, "A chant of 'We want questions! We want questions!' soon broke out, despite pleas from the moderator to set a better example for the children in attendance. Hoyer aides soon began scurrying about as, at a few points, it seemed like the organizers were about to lose control. A brief scuffle in the rear of the gymnasium sent sheriff's deputies running up the bleachers to escort at least one person from the gymnasium. As a trickle of people started to leave in apparent disgust, a woman in the front row began shouting back at the rowdy audience, calling them disrespectful. The remarks of a small business owner who addressed the crowd might as well have been elevator music as the crowd grew even more restless, and the catcalls grew louder, more frequent, and more colorful. 'Too much bulls--,' a man huffed while storming out."

Roll Call on the town hall: "The meeting, held in the gymnasium at North Point High School, had flashes of pandemonium as people shouted at Hoyer from the bleachers and then turned around to yell at each other. Others walked out in protest when they felt they couldn't ask their questions." Hoyer also defended his comment that those who shout down others are "un-American." "What is not consistent with our values is shouting down others when they want to speak. I want to make it very clear: That's what I was referring to. I can't believe there's anybody in this room who disagrees with that sentiment. We are a civil society," Hoyer said.

The Wall Street Journal gets a lengthy interview with the embattled South Carolina governor. "South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, stung by political attacks over his extramarital affair with an Argentine woman, said in his first extended interview since June that he no longer wants to 'crawl into a cave' and will fight to keep his job in the face of mounting public opposition. 'I have a newfound level of humility, knowing how hard I work and how hard I push is not the ultimate driver of change,' he said in the interview Monday. 'Power resides with people.'"

Is Sarah Palin's upcoming speech in Asia a practical joke? So reports Business Insider. "CLSA, the Asia-focused broker who invited Mrs. Palin as keynote speaker for an Asian investment conference, is well known for their cheeky takes on investment research. In the past, they've polled Asian fortune tellers for index targets, hired anime cartoonists to draw Japanese research, and generally love to push the boundaries between entertainment and analysis. They are a real research firm, it's just that they love to sprinkle in some hilarity every now and then as a smart marketing gimmick. Sarah Palin is this year's big laugh for them."

By the way, this Gallup survey is going to be VERY popular in the liberal/progressive and the conservative blogosphere as Gallup claims there are VERY few conservative Dems and moderate GOPers.

Although the two off-year gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia may be "poor proxies for national trends," Bloomberg writes that "the elections offer a test of whether the electricity Obama generated with voters during his campaign will power other Democrats." More: "the results in Virginia are more likely to telegraph national sentiment, said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia." He called Deeds and McDonnell "two relatively little-known candidates who are bland moderates, and that encourages the message-sending of voting." Because New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine's "woes owe largely to state-specific issues like higher property taxes, falling schools, crumbling roads and corruption," Bloomberg said the election there is "more likely to be a referendum on the incumbent Corzine."

ARKANSAS: "Arkansas state Sen. Gilbert Baker (R), who has been openly contemplating a Senate bid for nearly six months, announced Tuesday that he will challenge Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) in 2010," Roll Call says.

CALIFORNIA: Per The Hill, "California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi (D) and businessman David Harmer (R) are headed for a November showdown in the special election to replace former Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.). With all 176 precincts reporting in results delayed by wildfires in the region, Garamendi led the multi-party field with 26.1 percent of the vote. Harmer followed in second at 20.6 percent… Under California special election law, the top vote-getters from each party advance to the general election Nov. 3."

IOWA: Republicans have one hope in their quest to unseat Dem Gov. Chet Culver and that's FORMER GOP Gov. Terry Branstad. Some well-connected Republicans have started a "draft Branstad" PAC. The Web site went live this morning. For what it's worth, we're hearing that there's a better than 50-50 chance Branstad will answer the draft in the affirmative.

VIRGINIA: The Washington Post reports that Bob McDonnell utilized some of his most prominent female supporters to push back against criticism that he might be against working women and feminists, as his 1989 thesis suggested. "On Tuesday, he made his most prominent female supporter, Democrat Sheila Johnson, available to say she believes the document is an irrelevant distraction in a campaign that should focus on rejuvenating the state's economy."

"'This man has changed and evolved over the years. I am interested in Bob McDonnell from his record and what he's been doing for the state of Virginia,' said Johnson, who was a leading supporter of Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) and is part owner of the Washington WNBA team. 'As one working woman speaking to all working women out there, he really is the best candidate for governor.'"

Still, the Washington Post editorial/op-ed pages continue to blast McDonnell -- with columnist Ruth Marcus and cartoonist Tom Toles criticizing the thesis and McDonnell's partial repudiation of it.

From NBC's Athena Jones
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is prepared for an expected outbreak of swine flu this fall, but state and local governments, hospitals and individuals must do their part to help combat the illness, the president said during brief remarks in the Rose Garden on Tuesday.

For months, President Obama has been getting regular briefings on what the federal government and its agencies are doing to prepare for a second wave of this unusual strain of flu, which has already hit several South and Central American countries hard during the last several months, even afflicting leaders like Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Costa Rican President Oscar Arias. Today, he held a special briefing on the subject in the Oval Office.

"I don't want anybody to be alarmed, but I do want everybody to be prepared," Obama said. "We anticipate that there will be some issues coming up over the next several months; the way it's moving is still somewhat unpredictable, but what I'm absolutely confident about is that our team that's assembled here has done an extraordinary job in preparing for whatever may happen."

The president was joined in the Rose Garden by White House Homeland Security Advisor John Brennan, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Centers for Disease Control Director Tom Frieden, all of whom attended the briefing.

Today's remarks come as schools and colleges across the country begin welcoming students back to the classroom, places where disease tends to spread more quickly than among adults. Wake Forest University in North Carolina has already reported cases of swine flu among students returning to campus.

Obama said the government was basing its decisions on response plans on the best science available, that steady progress was being made on developing a safe, effective, voluntary and "strongly recommended" H1N1 vaccine and that a flu shot program would begin "soon."

Still, there is some concern that the vaccine will not be widely available until well into the fall.

The president asked that people follow "common-sense steps" to prevent the virus' spread, like staying home if they get sick, washing their hands frequently and covering sneezes with their sleeves not their hands. He urged people to visit www.flu.gov or ask their doctors for more information on the virus.

"We need state and local governments on the frontlines to make antiviral medications and vaccinations available and be ready to take whatever steps are necessary to support the health care system," Obama said. "We need hospitals and health care providers to continue preparing for an increase patient load and to take steps to protect health care workers. We need families and businesses to ensure they have plans in place if a family member, a child or a co-worker contracts the flu and needs to stay home."

Still, low-income workers and those without paid sick leave may find it difficult to stay home if they or their child come down with symptoms, concerns potentially exacerbated during these tough economic times.

The president used his brief remarks to tout economic news, arguing that a new report by The Institute for Supply Management, which showed the manufacturing sector grew in August for the first time in 19 months, was a sign the steps the administration had taken to spur a recovery were working.

"The statistics used to measure manufacturing output is the highest it's been in over two years," he said. "This means greater production of transportation equipment like cars and electronic equipment like computers and appliances and it means these companies are starting to invest more and produce more and it is a sign that we're on the path to economic recovery."

Critics of the president argue his efforts to save the economy have been too costly and have done little to create jobs or boost confidence.

"There's no doubt that we have a long way to go and I and the other members of this administration will not let up until those Americans looking for jobs can find them," Obama told reporters. "But this is another important sign that we're heading in the right direction."

From NBC's Ali Weinberg
North Carolina Democratic Reps. Bob Etheridge and Brad Miller criticized the tactics Republicans are using to derail Democratic efforts for a health-care reform bill. But they sidestepped the issue of a Democratic fissure over the public option that itself is threatening to derail the efforts.

When asked on a conference call whether pushing forward with a bill that doesn't include a public/government-run insurance option had the potential to split the Democratic caucus, Miller blamed the media for too much of a focus on politics.
 
"One of the frustrations of working on the issue is dealing with the extent to which the press is all about the horse race -- how are factions holding together," he said. "There is little coverage of what the plan actually does." 
 
That doesn't answer the question. Earlier today, we reported that the powerful labor union, the AFL-CIO, called the public option an "absolute must" and vowed to challenge those – even Democrats – who would oppose one.

On whether Democrats should continue to pursue bipartisanship, though, Etheridge said that while the Democrats would prefer to pass a bipartisan bill, "if bipartisanship means you don't do anything, it's not a very good alternative."
 
Miller also questioned Republicans' "conversion to protecting Medicare" as Democrats consider making cuts to the program.
 
"We should protect Medicare, but the recent vintage of [Republicans'] conversion to that cause may cause many Americans to question the sincerity of it," Miller said in a conference call with reporters.

The call was billed as a chance for Etheridge and Miller to "set the record straight" on a health-care forum held earlier in the day in the Tar Heel state by Republican Sens. Richard Burr (NC), Mitch McConnell (KY) and John McCain (AZ). But the Democrats hardly mentioned the forum.
 
Etheridge did, however, criticize Burr's proposal to tax health benefits and use the revenue to give people tax credits to buy their own care.
 
"If they think $700 is going to buy health insurance policy," Etheridge said, "I'm not sure where they're coming from."

From NBC's Mark Murray
Speaking with reporters today, leaders of the AFL-CIO argued that any final health-care legislation must contain the so-called public option to compete with private insurers, and that any Democrats who stand in the way won't receive its support.

"It is an absolute must," said AFL Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka, who likely will become the organization's next president when it gathers two weeks from now in Pittsburgh. "We won't support the bill if it doesn't have a public option in it."

Trumka also implied that members of Congress, including Democrats, who don't back health-care legislation with a public option risk losing the labor group's support -- something he mentioned yesterday when he said, "Today, more than ever, we need to be a labor movement that stands by our friends, punishes its enemies, and challenges those who, well, can't seem to decide which side they're on."

Today's remarks came at an event where the AFL-CIO released a poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Hart Research, showing the plight of younger workers (those 18-34) in this economy.

Per the poll, just 31% of these workers said they earned enough money to pay their bills and put some money aside; an additional 31% said they didn't have health insurance; and 51% said they had no retirement plan (pension/401k) at work.

The survey, said outgoing AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, "shows just how broken our economy is for young people and what is at stake if we don't fix it." 

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
While some in Massachusetts wait for Joe Kennedy's decision on whether to get in the race for his uncle's seat, the formidable Martha Coakley, the state's attorney general, has become the first to jump in.

The Boston Globe first reported the news: "Coakley this morning picked up nomination papers to run for the Senate seat of Edward M. Kennedy, becoming the first candidate to throw a hat in the ring for what promises to be a fierce five-month-long race. Coakley's nascent campaign picked up the documents from the secretary of state's elections division. She now needs to gather 10,000 certified voter signatures to qualify for the Dec. 8 Democratic primary. Those signatures must be submitted to city and town election officials for certification by Oct. 20."

Coakley has a lot going for her in this race. She's a well-regarded attorney general and would likely be the only woman in the running.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Michael Steele, the Republican National Committee chairman, stars front and center of the RNC's latest TV ad -- a direct play for seniors in this health-care fight.

The ad buy is "targeted" and "will run on select national cable networks and will also be aired in Florida," according to an RNC release. It's the second flank in Steele's effort to court seniors through what he calls a "Seniors' Bill of Rights." Last week, the party chairman wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post calling for such a bill with several key points. FactCheck.org, for one, found several errors.

In the TV ad, with chipper music in the background, Steele appears agreeable and proposes a five-point Seniors Bill of Rights:

- No Cuts to Medicare to Pay for a New Program
- Make it Illegal to Ration Health Care Based on Age
- Prevent any Government Role in End-Of-Life Care
- Prevent any Government Role in End-Of-Life Care
- And Stop Bureaucrats from Getting Between Seniors and Their Doctors

"A few things we should all agree on," Steele says in the ad. "The Seniors' Bill of Rights." He adds, "Oh and President Obama, it's not too late to change your mind. Stand with us and stand with senior citizens. After all, they've earned it."

But on the first point of "No cuts to Medicare," Steele told NPR's Steve Inskeep last week that he'd "absolutely" be in favor of certain Medicare cuts. He told the late Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press when running for the Senate that in order to control federal spending "everything has to be on the table," including cuts to Medicare.

And, as as Atlantic Media Political Director Ron Brownstein wrote in National Journal on Friday, "Steele's pledge this week to 'protect Medicare' might have been more convincing had it not come five months after nearly four-fifths of House Republicans voted to literally end the program as we know it for all Americans younger than 55."

NPR:

Mr. MICHAEL STEELE (Republican Party Chairman): What makes it a valuable program is that it is the last line of opportunity to receive health care for a lot of our seniors, and it has been now for - since the 1960s. The problem is, as we all note, that the system has been raided over the years, from time to time. It's become bloated, and in some cases efficiencies have not been maxed out. Therefore, it's running into problems where, you know, every few years we're having stories about Medicare falling apart and, you know, we've already projected it's going to be out of money in a few years.

INSKEEP: It's going to run out of money.

Mr. STEELE: Exactly.

INSKEEP: But you're coming here against reducing the spending on Medicare, restraining Medicare.

Mr. STEELE: No, no, no, no, no, no. That's not coming out against reducing the spending. That is not - I mean, that's a wonderful interpretation by the left, but what I was saying was don't go raiding the program without some sense of what we're taking from the program, the impact it's going to have on the senior citizens out there. You know, raiding a program that's already bankrupt to pay for another program that we can't afford is not good public policy.

INSKEEP: So you would be in favor of certain Medicare cuts?

Mr. STEELE: Absolutely. You want to maximize the efficiencies of the program. I mean, anyone who's in the program would want you to do that, and certainly those who manage it want you to that.

Meet the Press:

MR. RUSSERT: Your Web site, Mr. Steele, says you want to control runaway federal spending.

LT. GOV. STEELE: Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT: What programs would you cut?

LT. GOV. STEELE: Well, what I would like to do is something that we did in Maryland. We — Governor Ehrlich and I came into office, we had a $2.2 billion deficit staring us in the face and a bloated government to contend with. And so we stepped back and evaluated exactly what the priorities of our government should be. Seventy-eight percent of our spending is in two areas: education and health care.

MR. RUSSERT: It's the same in the federal government.

LT. GOV. STEELE: It's the same. And my point...

MR. RUSSERT: Seventy percent is Social Security, Medicare and Defense.

LT. GOV. STEELE: Absolutely. Absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you touch those?

LT. GOV. STEELE: Abso — Tim, everything has...

MR. RUSSERT: Everything's on the table.

LT. GOV. STEELE: Everything has to be on the table, my friend. We are living in a time — we have to — government has to act like the rest of, the rest of the world and sit back and look at your budget. If you don't have enough money in any given month, what do you do? You've got to reprioritize. You've got to take care of the business at hand. So what I want to do is a couple of things. One, I want to take a closer look at what we're spending. The last five, seven, eight years, Congress has lost its mind when it's come to spending. You couple that...

MR. RUSSERT: Controlled by the Republicans.

LT. GOV. STEELE: Absolutely. It doesn't matter, Republican or Democrat, I just put it out there. That's the reality of it. It's...

Brownstein:

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele's pledge this week to "protect Medicare" might have been more convincing had it not come five months after nearly four-fifths of House Republicans voted to literally end the program as we know it for all Americans younger than 55.

They cast that vote on April 2 in support of a GOP alternative budget plan that would have converted Medicare from an open-ended entitlement that guarantees seniors virtually unlimited access to care into a voucher system that provides future retirees only a fixed sum of money to purchase private health insurance. That approach -- a variation of legislation Republicans actually passed through the House when they controlled it in 2003 -- has some advocates among health policy experts. But this longstanding GOP prescription for Medicare emphatically violates most of the six principles that Steele enshrined this week as the pillars of a Republican "Health Care Bill of Rights" for seniors.

Although Republicans are accusing President Obama of embarking on a "risky experiment" by pursuing Medicare cost savings to help fund universal coverage, by any measure the plan that House Republicans endorsed this spring represents a much more wrenching change in the program. "Obama is doing some fine-tuning," says John Rother, vice president for policy at AARP, the giant seniors lobby. "This [Republican plan] would be a complete revolution and would fundamentally change the character of Medicare."

And to the broader point of whether Democrats are proposing cuts to Medicare, FactCheck.org writes:

The bill that's currently pending in the House would indeed "cut" $500 billion or so from Medicare, but it would also increase expenditures in some areas. The net amount that would be taken from the program would be about $219 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That's a 10-year figure, by the way. And any implication that seniors' Medicare benefits would be cut is false. Rather, the bill calls for holding down payments to hospitals and other providers,  other than physicians.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Earlier this morning in First Thoughts, we mentioned how Judd Gregg reiterated his opposition to Democrats' potential use of reconciliation to pass health care -- and what he plans to do about it.

The Hill: "Sen. Judd Gregg has hundreds of procedural objections ready for a healthcare plan Democrats leaders want to speed through the Senate. Gregg (N.H.), the senior Republican on the Budget Committee, told the Hill in a recent interview that Republicans will wage a vicious fight if Democrats try to circumvent Senate rules and use a budget maneuver to pass a trillion dollar healthcare plan with a simple majority" -- the same maneuver Republicans used when they controlled the White House and Congress.

But Gregg's position on reconciliation is something of an evolution, considering he supported using reconciliation in the Bush years for ANWR and tax cuts.

Even FOX News pointed that out in March:

"Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., top Republican on the Budget Committee, said Wednesday that reconciliation is not always a bad thing. He supported it when President Bill Clinton wanted tax increases to pay down the debt. But Gregg draws the line at creating major changes in environment and health care laws.

'When you are taking the entire health system of the United States, restructuring it, changing it fundamentally, moving it to the left significantly, basically nationalizing it for all intents and purposes ... without any opportunity for changes on the floor of the Senate, well, you might as well not have a Senate. You might as well just have a House of Representatives. It totally undermines the purposes of the two branches of government,' Gregg told FOX News.

Republicans are not exactly strangers to using the reconciliation process to create new programs. They tried to open drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge in 2005, with Gregg telling reporters at the time: 'The president asked for it, and we're trying to do what the president asked for.'

Former President George W. Bush got his massive tax cuts through the Senate, as well, when Republicans used the reconciliation tool. But Gregg defended those uses. 'It has always been on issues on policies which already exist -- adjusting tax laws, adjusting tax rates, affecting this program that already exists or that program.'"

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Obama's inheritance: While David Brooks today attributes Obama's struggles to abandoning the center, the troubles that the president and his administration are currently facing seem to have more to do with things they inherited -- a wrecked economy that many mainstream economists said had to be bailed out and stimulated by government, a public that already was mistrustful of government bailouts and spending (which explains the hesitance on health care), and a war in Afghanistan that hadn't received enough troops or attention. And today, conservative columnist George Will writes that it's time for the U.S. to get out of Afghanistan. A conservative-liberal coalition calling for a pullout could be a potent political force.

*** Between a rock and a hard place: Strikingly, the Obama administration's motivation on Afghanistan is pretty similar to its thinking on health care: a determination not to make the same mistakes that were made earlier. The fear of walking away from Afghanistan in the 1980s is something that haunts many Afghan policymakers. Let's also not forget: Our motivation to be there -- and perhaps to send more troops there to buttress the effort -- is as much about having a stable neighbor for nuclear power Pakistan as it is creating a stable environment for Afghanistan. But the choices for Team Obama certainly aren't good: Double down on an increasingly unpopular war, or risk walking away from an unstable Afghanistan and Pakistan.

*** Back to the center? Going back to Brooks' point that Obama has abandoned the center, did he abandon the center -- or did the center abandon him because of their own weariness? If the president is losing David Brooks, it could be because the White House hasn't made the public push for bipartisanship that so many like Brooks thought he would. At the beginning of the term, it seemed as if the push to include Republicans in his government was a sincere effort. But ever since, relations with Republicans and the president are at an all-time low. Part of that is perception. For instance, why hasn't the White House tried harder to go around the congressional GOP leadership and create their own bipartisan working groups with folks like Lamar Alexander, Dick Lugar, George Voinovich, Mel Martinez, Bob Corker etc… These are all folks who may not see eye-to-eye ideologically but would never turn down a White House meeting. The appearance is that the White House is simply inviting these folks to participate but it takes a constant sledgehammer to get them to believe the White House is serious about working with them. 

*** Waiting for Vicki to speak: Yesterday, we learned two things in the Kennedy succession story. One, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick picked Jan. 19 as the date for the special election to replace Kennedy in the Senate, with the primary to occur on Dec. 8. And two, the Massachusetts legislature will hold an expedited hearing on Sept. 9 on a bill that would allow Patrick to appoint an interim replacement until the special election. But here's the third thing we'll all waiting for: whether one of the Kennedys decides they want the seat. Until we hear from Vicki herself, Kennedy's widow, the speculation about her will likely continue, even though Patrick and people close to her say she's not interested. Some Democrats in DC would prefer that she take the seat, particularly if Dukakis is the alternative. But regardless, the thinking is she'd need the least amount of on the job training for the current debate over health care. Reminder: She's been helping to run the office and served as a conduit these last eight months. For now, though, the only Kennedy interested appears to be Joe, though many in Massachusetts have seen this movie before as Joe has started and stopped bids for governor multiple times. By the way, who will be the first to announce? Our bet: Attorney General Martha Coakley.

*** Time to stick a fork in Corzine? So much for the view that incumbent New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D) was narrowing the gap with challenger Chris Christie, at least according the newest Quinnipiac survey. Per that poll, Corzine trails Christie by 10 points (47%-37%), with independent Christopher Daggett at 9% -- in other words, 56% of folks supporting someone NOT NAMED Corzine. Last month, Christie's lead was six points (46%-40%), with Daggett at 7%. Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the poll for Corzine is that it comes after Christie has suffered a tough two weeks in the press, over his ties to the Bush administration, an undisclosed loan, and traffic tickets. Also troubling for Corzine, as well as for Democrats nationwide, is that Corzine linking Christie to George W. Bush -- even after Christie's reported conversations with Karl Rove became news -- doesn't seem to be working. In the poll, 56% of respondents and 59% of independents say those ads are unfair. By a 60%-34% margin, New Jersey voters disapprove of Corzine's job. President Obama's approval in New Jersey is on the plus side, 51%-43%. Still, it's New Jersey, the Lucy-Charlie Brown football of the Republican Party.

*** We're gonna party like it's 1989? Meanwhile, turning to the race for Virginia governor, who knew that the first major engagement of that contest would be sparked by a … graduate thesis? And Bob McDonnell's (R) conference call yesterday responding to the thesis he wrote in 1989 as a graduate student at what is now known as Regent University was extraordinary for its length (it exceeded an hour), for his repudiation of some of the things he wrote in it (on feminism, contraception), for whacking Creigh Deeds (D) at the same time, and for the tough questions he got from reporters. To us, the conference call was analogous to a football team that's ahead playing prevent defense -- McDonnell was willing to concede lots of yardage (disavowing parts of that '89 thesis) just as long as he didn't give up a big play (i.e., stand by his assertion in the thesis that feminism and working mothers are detrimental to the family). That said, the Washington Post editorial page, which has been VERY friendly to Deeds so far, has tried to advance the thesis story, penning an editorial entitled, "Bob McDonnell, Culture Warrior." Indeed, the last three sentences in it could be lifted directly and used in campaign ads targeting Northern Virginia women. Perhaps we'll see it.

*** Following the Kaine playbook: Despite being put on the defensive, McDonnell's conference call was smart on two fronts. One, there were no cameras, thus keeping it a print story (remember that George Allen's "Macaca story resonated because it was caught on tape). And two, the McDonnell camp can now say, "He's answered these questions until folks had no more." Another striking thing about McDonnell's conference call was how he seemed to borrow a page from the Tim Kaine playbook. In 2005, responding to concerns about his opposition to abortion and the death penalty, Kaine said he'd enforce the law of the land -- namely Roe v. Wade and Virginia's law permitting the death penalty. Well, yesterday, there was McDonnell explaining that his past opposition to abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, didn't much matter because he enforce the laws protecting abortion in those circumstances. "You must follow the law," he said. "I will enforce those laws as governor."

*** Obama's day: Taking a break from his "stay-cation" at the White House, President Obama receives a briefing on H1N1 preparedness at 1:15 pm ET. Later tonight, he hosts a dinner celebrating Ramadan.

Countdown to Election Day 2009: 63 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 427 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 New York Times front-pages, "A new report by the top commander in Afghanistan detailing the deteriorating situation there confronts President Obama with the politically perilous decision of whether to deepen American involvement in the eight-year-old war amid shrinking public support at home. The classified assessment submitted Monday by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who took over American and NATO forces in Afghanistan in June, did not request additional American troops, American officials said, but they added that it effectively laid the groundwork for such a request in coming weeks."

This AP story could cause some heartburn for the administration. "U.S. military authorities in Afghanistan have terminated a contract with a company that was producing profiles of reporters seeking to cover a war that's becoming increasingly unpopular with the American public… U.S. military officials have denied that the Rendon profiles were used to rate the coverage of individual reporters as positive, negative or neutral and that those scores influenced decisions on whether a journalist would be embedded with a military unit." More: "The reporter profiles were background information on the journalist that would help commanders know more about reporters assigned to their units and what topics they'd likely ask about, they said." But, "Stars and Stripes, a newspaper funded partly by the Defense Department, said the profiles had been used as recently as last year to keep reporters whose prior coverage had been negative from traveling with U.S. troops in Afghanistan. With public doubts about the war in Afghanistan growing, the implication was that the military was trying to reverse the trend by giving plum embed spots to reporters who have written favorably about the war."

Meanwhile, "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Obama are all scheduled to be in New York for the start of the UN General Assembly during the week of Sept. 20. If all goes to plan, Obama would host a three-way meeting in New York aimed at getting Netanyahu and Abbas to agree to return to full-fledged peace talks, Peres said."