From NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
In lieu of our normal weekly First Read Top 10, we’re running our updated Field of 64, the list of the 64 House seats we consider most likely to switch parties in the fall. (No. 1, for instance, is the seat we consider most likely to flip.) For Republicans to take back the House, they need to pick up a NET of 39 seats. (So if Democrats are able to win three or four GOP seats, as they’re hoping to do, then Republicans must win 42 or 43 Democratic seats.) Political journalists and junkies: Clip and save this list, because it gives you a good idea of where the House battlefield is and whether or not Republicans can reach the number it needs to take back the House. There are 58 Democratic-held seats on this list, and six GOP-held ones.

1. TN-6 (D-Open-Gordon) LIKELY R
2. LA-3 (D-Open-Melancon) LIKELY R
3. DE-AL (R-Open-Castle) LIKELY D
4. AR-2 (D-Open-Snyder) LIKELY R
5. NY-29 (D-Open-Massa) LIKELY R
6. LA-2 (R-Cao) LEAN D
7. OH-15 (D-Kilroy) LEAN R
8. OH-1 (D-Driehaus) LEAN R
9. KS-3 (D-Open-Moore) LEAN R
10. CO-4 (D-Markey) LEAN R
11. FL-24 (D-Kosmas) LEAN R
12. N-8 (D-Open-Ellsworth) LEAN R
13. IL-10 (R-Open-Kirk) LEAN D
14. MD-1 (D-Kratovil) LEAN R
15. VA-5 (D-Perriello) LEAN R
16. VA-2 (D-Nye) LEAN R
17. AZ-5 (D-Mitchell) TOSS UP
18. OH-16 (D-Boccieri) TOSS UP
19. PA-7 (D-Sestak-Open) TOSS UP
20. NM-2 (D-Teague) TOSS UP
21. PA-3 (D-Dahlkemper) TOSS UP
22. IL-11 (D-Halvorson) TOSS UP
23. AZ-1 (D-Kirkpatrick) TOSS UP
24. FL-2 (D-Boyd) TOSS UP
25. PA-11 (D-Kanjorski) TOSS UP
26. AR-1 (D-Open-Berry) TOSS UP
27. FL-8 (D-Grayson) TOSS UP
28. HI-1 (R-Djou) TOSS UP
29. PA-8 (D-Murphy) TOSS UP
30. ND-AL (D-Pomeroy) TOSS UP
31. SC-5 (D-Spratt) TOSS UP
32. NV-3 (D-Titus) TOSS UP
33. MS-1 (D-Childers) TOSS UP
34. TN-8 (D-Open-Tanner) TOSS UP
35. TX-17 (D-Edwards) TOSS UP
36. NH-1 (D-Shea-Porter) TOSS UP
37. MI-1 (D-Open-Stupak) TOSS UP
38. NH-2 (D-Open-Hodes) TOSS UP
39. SD-AL (D-Herseth Sandlin) TOSS UP
40. MI-7 (D-Schauer) TOSS UP
41. NY-19 (D-Hall) TOSS UP
42. WA-3 (D-Open-Baird) TOSS UP
43. OH-13 (D-Sutton) TOSS UP
44. WI-8 (D-Kagen) TOSS UP
45. NY-24 (D-Arcuri) TOSS UP
46. IN-9 (D-Hill) TOSS UP
47. IL-14 (D-Foster) TOSS UP
48. TX-23 (D-Rodriguez) TOSS UP
49. IL-17 (D-Hare) TOSS UP
50. CO-3 (D-Salazar) TOSS UP
51. GA-2 (D-Bishop) TOSS UP
52. CA-11 (D-McNerney) TOSS UP
53. WI-7 (D-Obey-Open) TOSS UP
54. AL-2 (D-Bright) TOSS UP
55. AZ-8 (D-Giffords) TOSS UP
56. WV-1 (D- Open-Mollohan) TOSS UP
57. NM-1 (D-Heinrich) LEAN D
58. NJ-3 (D-Adler) LEAN D
59. NC-8 (D-Kissell) LEAN D
60. GA-8 (D-Marshall) LEAN D
61. CA-3 (R-Lungren) LEAN R
62. NY-20 (D-Murphy) LEAN D
63. FL-25 (R-Diaz-Balart) LEAN R
64. IA-3 (D-Boswell) LEAN D

Television comedian Stephen Colbert has gotten famous by using his trademark conservative faux-outrage to label the United States Congress as a joke.

On Friday, a House subcommittee – maybe, sort of, actually we really don’t know -- might have played along.

“I certainly hope that my star power can bump this hearing all the way up to C-SPAN One,” Colbert promised members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security, where he appeared as a witness on the issue of migrant farm work.

The subcommittee chairman invited the Comedy Central personality to testify at the hearing, which addressed the possibility of offering illegal immigrant farm workers a path to citizenship. Colbert’s “expertise” in the arena of immigration and farm labor stems from a July 2010 episode of his TV show “The Colbert Report,” during which he joined subcommittee chairwoman Rep. Zoe Lofgren to spend a day doing the work of an agriculture laborer.

Speaking in character as a bigoted and irate “free-market guy,” Colbert argued in his testimony that “we have to do something” about the plight of farm workers “because I am not going back out there.”

“At this point, I break into a cold sweat at the sight of a salad bar,” he said.

It's unclear upon how many members of the committee the joke was lost.

Rep. John Conyers, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, initially requested that Colbert leave the hearing room before his testimony, arguing that his presence had achieved its purpose by bringing attention to the hearing's subject matter. Lofgren interceded, saying that Colbert was in attendance at the subcommittee’s request, and Conyers relented.

Colbert did not stick to his (joke-free) prepared testimony, breaking from his planned dry statistics about American agriculture in favor of gags about entering his colonoscopy results into the Congressional Record.

If the committee’s intent was garnering publicity by inviting a late-night comic as its star witness, it worked. Lofgren commented at the outset of the hearing that she had not seen so many cameras in a hearing room since the impeachment.

Asked if it was appropriate for a comedian to testify on the Hill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters, "Of course."

"He's an American. He comes before the committee. He has a point of view. He can bring attention to an important issue like immigration," she said. "I think it's great."

Colbert did note the seriousness of the issue of immigration during the hearing's question-and-answer period, saying that he likes "talking about people who have no power."

"Migrant workers suffer. And have no rights," he said.

NBC's Lea Sutton and Shawna Thomas contributed to this report.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Introducing our Voter Confidence Index… It currently shows Obama with a -38 score… That’s eight points WORSE than where Clinton and the Dems stood in ’94 (when they lost 54 House seats)… It’s 17 points BETTER than where George W. Bush and the GOP stood in ’06 (when they lost 30 seats)… And it’s three points WORSE than where Reagan and the GOP stood in ’82 (when they lost 26 seats)… Bottom line: The current political environment is bad for Democrats, and it forecasts significant losses in November… Elsewhere: Cuomo goes on the attack… Boxer up by six in new Field Poll… Heads up: Our Field of 64 House seats to be released later today… Profiling PA-10… And Castle is planning to a poll to gauge how he’d fare as a write-in candidate.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Introducing the Voter Confidence Index (VCI): How do you measure the current political environment and what it means for the November elections -- with just one number? And how do you compare it with past cycles? Well, your First Read authors and MSNBC.com have tried by creating what we’re calling the Voter Confidence Index. For this index, we’re using a combination of three questions commonly asked in national polls -- the president’s job approval rating, the direction of the country, and the generic congressional ballot. Bottom line: A positive (+) VCI is good for the president’s party; a negative (-) one is bad. And the worse the number, GENERALLY the worse the president's party performs in the midterms.

*** So what does the VCI currently tell us? It shows President Obama and the Democratic Party on the negative side, with a -38 VCI average for the month of September. That’s eight points worse than where President Clinton and the Democrats stood in 1994 (when Democrats lost House 54 seats). It’s 17 points better than where George W. Bush and Republicans stood in 2006 (when Republicans lost 30 seats). It’s three points worse than where Ronald Reagan and the GOP were in 1982 (when Republicans lost 26 House seats and when unemployment was at 10%, like it nearly is today). What’s more, today’s VCI is starkly different from when Obama’s presidency began. In May of 2009, the VCI was +41. The index’s steady drop tracks with the controversial debate over health care, the Gulf oil spill, and general uncertainty about the economy. We will continue to track the VCI from now until the election, and this one number will allow you to see movement faster than trying to track all three questions on any given day. We've been kicking the tires on this for months looking for a loophole, but haven't found it yet. Nothing is perfect in projecting an actual House seat gain or loss, but this will put you on sounder footing when coming up with your ranges. For the full interactive chart and data, click here.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

*** Which polls did we use? There are many polls out there, and there’s plenty of disagreement in the statistical community about what constitutes a good poll or a bad poll. The NBC News standard is to generally use polls that are done with live callers, not ones that are automated. For the VCI, we chose to use the best-known and most-often conducted live-caller national polls: NBC News/Wall Street Journal, ABC News/Washington Post, CBS News/New York Times, Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, CNN/Opinion Research, Pew Research, USA Today/Gallup, Ipsos (including AP, Reuters, McClatchy), AP/GFK, Bloomberg/Selzer, and Newsweek. We computed our VCI by taking the average from all of these polls. For the VCI scores for past presidents dating back to Gerald Ford, our NBC/WSJ pollsters went back and calculated the national averages. Here’s the full explainer on how we calculate the VCI.

*** Cuomo goes on the attack: After a new Quinnipiac poll showed him leading by just six points, Andrew Cuomo (D) is up with a new TV ad hitting GOP opponent Carl Paladino (R) in New York's gubernatorial race. The New York Times says the ad criticizes Paladino “for his donations to Albany politicians and for his failure to create jobs after winning tax breaks intended to promote economic development.” Question: Is Cuomo overreacting a bit to one poll? As we pointed out earlier, it appears Quinnipiac’s likely voter model is leaving out lots of Democrats. Indeed, a new Siena poll shows Cuomo with a very large lead.

*** Boxer up by six in new Field Poll: A day after the Field Poll found Jerry Brown (D) and Meg Whitman (R) tied in California’s gubernatorial contest, the poll has Barbara Boxer (D) leading Carly Fiorina (R) in the Senate race by six points, 47%-41%. Per the Sacramento Bee, "The poll found that impressions of Boxer are sharply divided and highly partisan, with 93 percent of all likely voters having an opinion of her. It found that Boxer still has a high unfavorable rating of 48 percent. But it has declined from a high of 52 percent two months ago. 'She's hanging in,' said Mark DiCamillo, the poll's director. 'It looks like she's had a pretty good month or two.'"

*** Heads up: In lieu of our normal Friday Top 10, later today we’ll be releasing our “Field of 64” list of what we consider the top 64 House seats that might switch parties in November. The list, like the NCAA bracket, can be split up into four buckets. The VERY vulnerable (approximately 16 districts), the potentially VERY vulnerable (the next 16), the majority makers (seats 33-48) and the wave/upset specials (49-64).

*** 75 House races to watch: PA-10: The Democratic nominee is two-term incumbent Chris Carney, who was first elected in 2006. The GOP nominee is former U.S. Attorney Tom Marino. In ’08, McCain won 54% of the vote in the district -- which is in the Northeast part of the state -- and Bush won 60% in ’04. As of June 30, Carney had almost $800,000 in the bank, while Marino had just $11,000. Carney voted against the stimulus and cap-and-trade but for health care. Both Cook and Rothenberg rate the contest as a Toss Up.

*** More midterm news: In Delaware, Mike Castle is planning to conduct a poll to see how he would fare as a write-in candidate, Politico writes… In West Virginia, per the Washington Post, the NRSC is up with a seven-figure TV ad buy hitting Dem Senate nominee Joe Manchin.

Countdown to Election Day 2010: 39 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.

"President Obama outlined a leading role for the United States in promoting human rights and democracy around the world Thursday, laying out a new foreign policy initiative that his advisers said will guide his diplomacy in the years ahead," the Washington Post says. "In his second annual address to the U.N. General Assembly, Obama spoke more directly than he has previously about the importance of human rights and democracy in ensuring a stable world economy and global security. His words evoked those of his predecessor, George W. Bush, whose emphasis on promoting democracy once drew Obama's criticism."

The AP: "The issue of Iran’s nuclear program was little more than a footnote in President Obama’s wide-ranging, 35-minute speech before the United Nations yesterday. But behind the scenes, US and Iranian officials appeared to be engaging in preliminary efforts to reopen talks to resolve what many consider the greatest global threat: a nuclear-armed Iran," AP reports.

"Defense Secretary Robert Gates has no plans to stay on at the Pentagon through the end of President Obama’s first term in office," The Hill writes. "Gates, whose service now spans one Republican and one Democratic administration, told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday that he has already made up his mind about his departure date, but refused to disclose any more details."

Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu is blocking President Obama’s nominee to head OMB, Jack Lew, the Washington Post says. Landrieu “announced she will place a hold on the nomination until the Obama administration lifts a moratorium on deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. ‘Although Mr. Lew clearly possesses the expertise necessary to serve as one of the President's most important economic advisers, I found that he lacked sufficient concern for the host of economic challenges confronting the Gulf Coast,’ Landrieu wrote in a letter informing Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid of her decision.”

Per the New York Times, “Senate Democrats said Thursday that they would postpone a highly contentious floor fight over what to do about the expiring Bush-era tax cuts until after the November elections, a decision that spares some politically vulnerable incumbents from casting a potentially difficult vote to let taxes rise for the rich. Democrats said they would still fight to end the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans when they return for a lame-duck session. But the delay increases the likelihood of a compromise with Republicans who have insisted that the lower rates continue for everyone, at least temporarily, given the weak economy.”

Politico on the Dems’ decision: “After all the bold talk, it’s a remarkable turnaround — and loss of nerve — that all but ensures that the House also won’t act before going home next week.”

“On a 237-187 vote, the House on Thursday approved a $42 billion bill to provide aid to small businesses. The Senate approved the legislation last week, and President Obama plans to sign the legislation on Monday.”

"Senate Democrats again failed to advance stalled campaign finance legislation on Thursday, dealing another blow to the bill's chances of final passage," The Hill reports. "The legislation, known as the Disclose Act, is intended as a response to a Supreme Court decision earlier this year that relaxed limits on political spending by corporations and unions. A cloture vote Thursday afternoon to move forward on the legislation failed 59-39. Sixty votes were needed for passage. Centrist GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe's (Maine) announcement earlier Thursday that she would again vote against the legislation, which came after she'd cast doubt on its constitutionality, virtually confirmed the second cloture vote would fail."

USA Today writes up the unveiling of the House Republicans’ “Pledge to America”: “House Republican leaders vowed to reverse the course of Washington and ‘realign our country's compass’ in a wide-ranging agenda unveiled six weeks before the fall elections,” USA Today says.

Paul Krugman on the House GOP Pledge: "In essence, what they say is, 'Deficits are a terrible thing. Let’s make them much bigger.' The document repeatedly condemns federal debt — 16 times, by my count. But the main substantive policy proposal is to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which independent estimates say would add about $3.7 trillion to the debt over the next decade — about $700 billion more than the Obama administration’s tax proposals."

The Washington Post: "There are no specifics about how the spending cuts would be carried out, and the agenda does not outline how Republicans would deal with Social Security and other expensive federal entitlement programs, saying only that lawmakers "will make the decisions that are necessary" to cut costs. The agenda is designed to give voters a broad outline of what proposals House Republicans will push if they regain the majority and to give their candidates specifics to cite on the campaign trail. It also aims to answer a favorite attack line of Democrats: that Republicans have no new ideas and are merely the 'party of no.'"

"Asked by CNN if he would act to shut down the government if his conference could not agree with President Obama on spending, [John] Boehner said 'Our goal is to fight for a smaller, less costly and more accountable government here in Washington, D.C. It's not to shut down the government,'" The Hill writes, noting, "Some Republican candidates and office-holders, such as Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.), have raised the specter of shutting down the government if their party comes to an impasse with the White House."

At a fundraiser for Barbara Mikulski in Maryland, Vice President Biden said: “Maybe the best thing to happen to us lately is the Tea Party wins. Maybe it’ll shake some of our constituency out of their lethargy.” And he guaranteed Dems hold the House: “I guarantee you we’re going to have a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate. I absolutely believe that."

The New York Times takes a look at Americans for Job Security, a nonprofit advocacy group that “far from being a national movement advocating a ‘pro-paycheck message,” the group is actually a front for a coterie of political operatives, devised to sidestep campaign disclosure rules.”

CALIFORNIA: "California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's comparison of Fresno and Detroit has drawn criticism from the Motor City mayor's office, with his spokeswoman calling on the billionaire GOP candidate to focus on investing in communities hit hardest by the financial meltdown," AP writes. Whitman told the San Jose Mercury News: "Fresno looks like Detroit. It's awful." That led to a series of backtracks, including: "What I was trying to communicate was Fresno, the Central Valley, has been very hard hit. As hard hit as places like Detroit. So that's what I was trying to communicate. "Listen, I want people to really understand that what is so heartbreaking is the high unemployment rate in Fresno. Fresno is a great town, I love the Central Valley."

COLORADO: “Colorado Senate candidate Ken Buck is up today with a new, positive ad, featuring a woman named Betty Grauberger praising his work as a district attorney and calling Buck a "good man." The ad pitches Buck to a group of voters - senior citizens - whom Democrats have aggressively targeted with commercials warning that Buck wants to privatize Social Security,” Politico notes.

DELAWARE: “Rep. Mike Castle is planning on polling a potential three-way Senate race to test his chances as a write-in candidate,” Politico reports.

GEORGIA: "The controversy over Rep. Sanford Bishop's decision to award charity scholarships to his relatives has expanded as four more students tied to the south Georgia Democrat and his wife have acknowledged receiving them, as well," the AP reports. "Bishop earlier this month repaid the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation $6,350 to cover the cost of scholarships that he provided to his stepdaughter and niece.”

MISSOURI: “Missouri Senate candidate Rep. Roy Blunt has backed off an earlier pledge to participate in a series of debates with Democrat Robin Carnahan, agreeing to just two face-offs — neither of which will appear on network television,” Politico reports. “The seven-term GOP congressman and the secretary of state will go head to head just twice on two consecutive days in mid-October – despite a request by Blunt just a month ago for six debates, including two on national television.”

NEVADA: Fight Night: "A Nevada Senate candidate forum ended in a scuffle, and this time, it wasn't just the candidates exchanging jabs." At "an impassioned event during which the crowd both heckled and cheered Republican Sharron Angle and Democrat Harry Reid," a man pushed a girl over and punched her friend in the face, AP reports.

NEW YORK: In NY-23, despite losing the GOP nomination to Matt Doheny, Doug Hoffman will run on the Constitution Party ticket, giving the edge in this race to Democrat Bill Owens, who won in a three-way race in a special election in 2009 involving Hoffman as well.

WEST VIRGINIA: “The National Republican Senatorial Committee will launch ads in the West Virginia Senate race today, a seven-figure expenditure that strongly suggests the party thinks they can pull off an upset in the Mountain State,” the Washington Post’s Cillizza reports.

In kinder, gentler times, elected officials were known to blushingly apologize if caught using indelicate language to describe a political opponent.

Now? Yeah, not so much.

Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern, who on Monday referred to Tea Party members with a variation of the f-word, sent out a fundraising appeal this afternoon with the subject line: “My Swear Jar.”

“My comments from earlier in the week have become a national story, and many people in the Republican Tea Party have demanded that I apologize,” he wrote. “I won’t.”

Redfern contends that his use of a Grade A swear word is far less serious than activists’ comparisons between Obama and Hitler or Birthers’ “screaming” about the president’s alleged country of origin.

“Give me a break,” he said in the fundraising email. “THEY should be the ones apologizing. That’s why I’m asking you to contribute to my ‘swear jar’ to help us beat our opponents in November.”

A bill that creates a $30 billion fund for community banks to open up lending to small businesses passed the House today, 237-187 with nine not voting.

The bill was passed overwhelmingly by Democrats alone. Just one Republican voted for it (Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina). Thirteen Democrats voted against: Berry, Boyd, Childers, DeFazio, Edwards (TX), Herseth Sandlin, Mitchell, Peterson, Polis, Shuler, Taylor, Titus, and Velazquez.

The Democratic no votes fall in two categories: (1) those in tough races or conservative-leaning districts: Berry, Boyd, Childers, Edwards (TX), Herseth Sandlin, Mitchell, Peterson, Shuler, and Titus; and (2) liberals in safe districts: DeFazio, Polis, and Velazquez.

Peterson (MN-7) represents a conservative-leaning district that voted for McCain (53%-45%) and Bush (57%-42%). He voted for the stimulus, cap-and-trade, but not health care; Shuler won his Western North Carolina seat in the Democratic wave year of 2006.

Politico's Rogers has more on the liberal "no" votes:

House Democrats representing black and Hispanic districts remain concerned that there aren’t more protections to insure that the money reaches smaller owners, and no less that Small Business Committee Chair Nydia Velazquez vote against the measure on final passage, “Unfortunately, the legislation we are considering today does not provide the protections we need to make sure that small businesses access affordable capital,” the New York Democrat told her colleagues in floor debate Thursday.

Those not voting: Blunt, Boren, Bright, Castor, Fallin, Hall, Kennedy, Meek, Young

An identical bill passed the Senate last week, 61-38, with just two Republicans voting for it (Voinovich, LeMieux).

President Obama is expected to sign it into law on Monday.

This bill aims to address the major economic problem of the lack of availability of credit and loans for small businesses.

AP:

"It's still very difficult out there to raise capital if you're a small or mid-sized bank," said Paul Merski, chief economist of the Independent Community Bankers of America, a trade group for smaller Main Street banks, tells AP. "If the economy continues growing again and you have thousands of banks around the country that cannot raise the additional capital to meet the small business lending growth, then we have a stalemate."

The loan fund is opposed, however, by most Republicans, who liken it to the 2008 bailout of the financial system. They warn it would encourage banks to make loans to borrowers who aren't good credit risks."

"What we have today before us is junior TARP," said Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Fla.

*** UPDATED 4:08, 4:30 PM, 4:40 ET *** Adds names of Republican House members, Democrats who crossed party lines and identifies those who did not vote.

House Republicans’ new “Pledge to America” focuses heavily on proposals to rein in federal spending and slash taxes. But it’s not getting rave reviews from one conservative organization dedicated to limited government and “economic freedom.”

Citing the Pledge’s lack of an explicit ban on earmarks and a specific amendment – like the one proposed in the 1994 “Contract with America” -- to balance the budget, a staff member for the Club for Growth panned the campaign manifesto, calling it “milquetoast.”

“I want to like the new GOP Pledge to America,” wrote Andy Roth, the organization’s vice president for government affairs, on the Club for Growth’s blog today. “I want to endorse it, but it's so milquetoast that it proves to me that these guys just aren't ready to lead.”

“The Pledge has not [sic] teeth,” he said. “Voters have no reliable assurances that House Republicans will behave appropriately.”

It's not unusual for the D.C.-based group to endorse candidates and policy proposals that are more conservative than those backed by establishment Republicans. Among its favored candidates this cycle are Tea Party-backed Rand Paul of Kentucky, Sharron Angle of Nevada, and Ken Buck of Colorado – none of whom had the backing of the National Republican Senatorial Committee before winning their respective GOP primaries.

Bloggers on the left and right had plenty to say about the the Republican party's new "Pledge to America," which, as First Read wrote earlier, divided conservative circles with some criticizing the proposal as being light on new policy recommendations.

National Review Online, whose editors came out in support of the document today, posted several additional defenses of the agenda.

Ralph Reed, former Christian Coalition head who was connected to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, compared and contrasted the pledge with the 1994 House Republicans' Contract With America, noting that he was "privileged to work closely with Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and their compatriots" on the contract.

My only criticism then and now is that there didn’t seem to be second act. After the first 100 days and the flurry of floor votes on the ten items in the Contract, the GOP fountainhead of ideas seemed to be a spent volcano. The lesson: Next time, make sure the agenda envisions 100 months, not 100 days.

That is why the House Republicans’ Pledge to America is so encouraging. It’s big, brash, and bold, calling for everything from disarming Iran and winning the wars and the subsequent peace in Iraq and Afghanistan to repealing Obamacare. This is a tall order. Good. Governing is a marathon, not a sprint, and Republicans now grasp that reality.

Seth Liebsohn, a fellow at the Claremont Institute, suggested Democrats should be envious of the plan.

If I were a Republican voter, I'd be saying, "Yes, this is what I want." If I were an independent, I'd be saying "Yes, this is what I think." If I were a Democrat, I'd be saying, "Damn, I wish we had this." The last one is the most true, I think: The Democrats have nothing like this -- all they have are really bad numbers and indicia; they do not have a convincing blueprint that shows the way out of the mess or doldrums that people believe they created. They get occasional assurances from the White House and President Obama, but they don't ring right and are not convincing. They have nothing -- not even op-ed writers -- to help them see what is right about their philosophy of governance right now. Whatever our chances were for November, they just increased.

And NRO's Kathryn Jean Lopez posts a few reactions from readers, including this one:

I like it. Those who say it isn’t enough need to understand that it is just a beginning. Also, any time the young guns and Boehner can get face time works for me. It forces the media to acknowledge that the Republicans are not what Pres. Obama accuses them of. They are no longer the “party of no,” but the party of “here we come!”

On the liberal side, AMERICAblog's Chris in Paris panned the Republicans' inclusion of their oft-repeated call to permanently extend all Bush tax cuts, including those to the wealthiest Americans.

"Who really needs to pay for expensive giveaways to the wealthiest Americans anyway? Hasn't that been the ongoing Republican plan anyway? Looks like they're not the only ones who can't figure out what "change" is supposed to mean. Details, details. Who needs 'em?"

Balloon Juice John Cole's shared the same sentiment of "nothing new to see here."

The GOP has released their new “Pledge for America,” and surprising no one, it looks like the prescription for the future is tax cuts, missile defense, gay-bashing and fetus worship, and investigating ACORN the White House.

Linking to the classic song "We Don't Get Fooled Again," (Meet the new boss, same as the old boss), Cole continued:

Sadly, America no longer listens to the Who. I, for one, look forward to the new regime of tax cuts for Jesus.

Daily Kos' DemFromCT singled out the provision intending to repeal and replace the entire health care bill, which includes the popular law forbidding insurance companies from dropping patients with pre-existing conditions.

The blogger excerpted from a New York Times story on one family who benefited from the new law.

Bill and Victoria Strong’s 3-year-old daughter, who has a degenerative condition, can now be covered by health insurance that does not have a lifetime cap on benefits.

So the Republicans want to repeal these measures and tell the Strongs their daughter is out of luck? Good luck with that.

Washington Monthly's Steve Benen concluded that the agenda demonstrates Republicans' rhetorical strenth and policy weakness, but that the imbalance between the two skills may not matter in the runup to the midterms.

Today, the House GOP will release a "Pledge" that simply doesn't make any sense to those who take reality seriously. It's a reminder that the Republican Party just isn't good at this sort of thing. It excels in attack ads, smear campaigns, and media manipulation; but the GOP struggles badly, to the point of comedy, when asked to do substantive work.

Ultimately, it may not matter. Voters are frustrated by a weak economy, and so Democrats are very likely to lose badly in November, even if they're being punished for trying to clean the GOP's mess. But electoral success for Republicans in the fall need not translate to an endorsement of this "Pledge." It's a transparent sham.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Bill Clinton has been enjoying a renaissance among the chattering class.

Pegged to his Clinton Global Initiative, he's giving advice to President Obama that the press is eating up. "Embrace people’s anger, including their disappointment at you," he told Politico. "And just ask ‘em to not let the anger cloud their judgment. Let it concentrate their judgment. And then make your case.”

Clinton added on "Meet the Press": "I think that [Democrats'] only chance here is to shake their own voters out of their apathy and respond to the legitimate voter anger by saying, 'What's going to happen in the next two years? What do we need to do, and who's more likely to do it.'"

And MSNBC's Joe Scarborough declared on "Morning Joe" today that there are many Democrats who wish Clinton could run for president again.

What explains the renaissance? Here's one explanation: Clinton is benefiting from the passage of time and Washington's collective short-term memory. (Two other reasons: Obama's weakened standing has created an opening for Clinton nostalgia, and Republicans no longer are attacking him.)

After all, it was just two years ago when Clinton was blamed -- due to his infamous comments in South Carolina -- for harming his wife's presidential bid. Also two years ago, these were constant criticisms of Clinton: He never won 50% of the vote in '92 and '96... He failed to pass health care... He squandered his second term.

And those were complaints among Democrats and liberals. Republicans and conservatives focused on his impeachment, the state of his marriage, and the numerous scandals during his administration, either real or imagined (Whitewater, Travelgate, fundraising with the Lincoln Bedroom).

Now when California gubernatorial nominee Jerry Brown (D) jokes about Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and then has to apologize for the joke, Clinton's rehabilitation is fully complete.

Of course, the passage of time and political forgetfulness could end up benefiting others. A year from now -- if she runs for president -- will voters and commentators remember that Sarah Palin quit her job as Alaska governor? What about her false accusation of "death panels" during the health-care debate?

Likewise, a year from now -- if the unemployment rate drops, and his poll numbers go up -- will Obama become the new "Comeback Kid"?

In short, time heals plenty of political wounds. More evidence of that: Republicans are poised -- just four years after being fired, and two years after George W. Bush left office with an approval rating in the 20s -- of taking back the House.

Why the House GOP “Pledge to America” is more like the Dems’ Six for ‘06 than the Contract with America… Pledge lists plans on five issue areas: jobs and the economy, government spending, health care, reforming Congress, and national security… The contradictions and omissions in it… And the conservative divide over it… Health care law provisions take effect today… Bill Clinton gives advice to Obama (via Politico)… Obama’s day at the UN… Profiling PA-7… And Whitman and Brown tied in new Field Poll.

From NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** The Pledge: Raise your hand if you remember the House Democrats’ “Six for ‘06” agenda (also called the “New Direction for America”). It was a list of priorities that Democrats, in the summer of 2006, said they would pursue if they won control of the House. As it turned out, it wasn’t a major factor that midterm season, but many of the priorities -- redeploying from Iraq, making college tuition more affordable, promoting energy-efficient technologies, lifting restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research -- have been enacted or accomplished since then (it took winning the White House in 2008 to finish their list of 2006 promises). Well, in Sterling, VA, House Republicans this morning will unveil their governing blueprint if they win back the majority in November. It’s called “A Pledge to America,” but it really isn’t a call to revolutionize the way Congress does business like the GOP’s “Contract with America” did in 1994. Rather, the “Pledge” is a laundry list of coveted priorities -- like “Six for ‘06” was. And it may be a list of priorities that will need a second GOP victory in 2012 to totally accomplish a la the Dems '06 pledge list.

*** Plans for the economy, government spending, health care, reforming Congress, national security: The 21-page document contains five plans: on jobs and the economy (make the Bush tax cuts permanent, give small businesses a tax deduction, require congressional approval of new federal regulations that cost $100 million or more); on government spending (cut government spending to its 2008 level, cap new discretionary spending, cut Congress’ budget, freeze the hiring of non-security federal workers; hold WEEKLY spending cut votes); on health care (repeal the health-care law, enact medical malpractice reform, ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions); on reforming Congress (post the text of any legislation online at least three days before coming up for a vote, end the practice of attaching non-germane bills to must-pass legislation; provide in EVERY bill the specific Constitutional provision); and on national security (fully fund missile defense, require tough sanctions against Iran, and enforce the border).

*** The contradictions and the omissions: But the GOP’s blueprint also contains obvious contradictions. How does this demonstrate the GOP has new ideas when its first policy proposal is making the Bush tax cuts permanent? How do you reduce the deficit if you make those tax cuts permanent? Why work to ensure access for patients with pre-existing conditions if you repeal a law that already does that? Why push for tax cuts for small businesses when your party has opposed similar cuts that Democrats have offered? (Indeed, will House Republicans today vote for that Democratic measure?) And then there’s this: The document makes absolutely no mention about what to do regarding the war in Afghanistan. (It does talk about Iran and lumps immigration in their national security section). It also ignores what to do about Social Security and Medicare. And how do you truly address cutting government spending if you ignore Social Security and Medicare?

*** A conservative house divided: Conservatives are divided over the Pledge. Red State’s Erick Erickson pans it. “This document proves the GOP is more focused on the acquisition of power than the advocacy of long term sound public policy. All the good stuff in it is stuff we expect them to do. What is not in it is more than a little telling that the House GOP has not learned much of anything from 2006.” On the other hand, the folks at National Review like it. “The pledge commits Republicans to working toward a broad conservative agenda that, if implemented, would make the federal government significantly smaller, Congress more accountable, and America more prosperous.” David Frum explains why the Pledge isn't as bold as Erickson wants it. "You can primary a Bob Bennett, you can nominate a Sharron Angle, you can balk Karl Rove and Mike Castle -- but when decision hour arrives, the leadership of the party rejects the assessment of the American electorate offered by Rush Limbaugh, Dick Armey and for that matter Erick Erickson."

*** Change you can believe in? So you can already see the conflict and tension within the conservative movement if Republicans take back Congress. In fact, it isn’t too dissimilar between what President Obama and Democrats have faced from the left. In short, the liberal and conservative bases want to go farther than politics actually allows. Here's the thing: The Pledge is more detailed and substantive than the 1994 Contract, but also very politically safe. It's a document that tries to find areas where everyone in the Republican voting tent can agree on right now. In short, it's a document that attempts to find a center with in the Republican Party.

*** Health law provisions take effect: On the same day that the House GOP’s Pledge will vow to repeal the health-care law, many of its central provisions -- which are individually popular -- take effect. The New York Times: “Starting now, insurance companies will no longer be permitted to exclude children because of pre-existing health conditions, which the White House said could enable 72,000 uninsured to gain coverage. Insurers also will be prohibited from imposing lifetime limits on benefits. The law will now forbid insurers to drop sick and costly customers after discovering technical mistakes on applications. It requires that they offer coverage to children under 26 on their parents’ policies.”

*** Bill Clinton’s advice to Obama: Turning to the Democrats, Bill Clinton -- in an interview with Politico -- offered advice to Obama. “He’s being criticized for being too disengaged, for not caring,” Clinton said. “So he needs to turn into it. I may be one of the few people that think it’s not bad that that lady said she was getting tired of defending him. He needs to hear it. You need to hear.” More: “So I just tell him to sort of try to get the country up again without being -- looking -- naïve or la-la, but be optimistic about our future. Embrace people’s anger, including their disappointment at you. And just ask ‘em to not let the anger cloud their judgment. Let it concentrate their judgment. And then make your case.” Clinton also makes the case that thanks to Newt Gingrich in 1994, the idea that "all politics is local" might be out of date. In making his that the president and Democrats should nationalize this election, he also argues that ALL politics these days are national and when you consider the unintended consequence of the shrinking local political media combined with the simultaneous expansion of the NATIONAL political media, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. So for the candidate for Congress who tries to talk local issues, the avg. swing voter tuning into the political debate wonders why they aren't participating in the NATIONAL political debate.

*** Obama’s day at the UN: At 10:00 am ET, President Obama addresses the United Nations General Assembly. According to excerpts the White House has released, Obama will focus his remarks on the ongoing direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians. “The conflict between Israelis and Arabs is as old as this institution. And we can come back here, next year, as we have for the last sixty, and make long speeches about it,” the president is expected to say. “We can read familiar lists of grievances. We can table the same resolutions. We can further empower the forces of rejectionism and hate. We can waste more time by carrying forward an argument that will not help a single Israeli or Palestinian child achieve a better life. We can do that. Or we can say that this time will be different -- that this time we will not let terror, or turbulence, or posturing, or petty politics stand in the way.”

*** 75 House races to watch: PA-7: The Democratic nominee for this open seat, being vacated by Joe Sestak (D), is state Rep. Bryan Lentz. The GOP nominee is former U.S. attorney Pat Meehan. In 2008, Obama won 56% in this district – which represents the Philly suburbs – while Kerry won 53% in ’04. As of June 30, Lentz had nearly $800,000 in the bank, compared with Meehan’s $1.1 million. Both Cook and Rothenberg rate the contest as a Toss Up.

*** More midterm news: In California, a new Field Poll has Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman tied at 41% each among likely voters (so despite the millions Whitman has spent, the race is still even)… Also in California, Carly Fiorina’s campaign has a new TV ad highlighting the clip when Barbara Boxer dressed down a general before a committee hearing.

Countdown to Election Day 2010: 40 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.

“On Thursday, the six-month anniversary of the signing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a number of its most central consumer protections take effect, just in time for the midterm elections,” the New York Times says. Starting now, insurance companies will no longer be permitted to exclude children because of pre-existing health conditions, which the White House said could enable 72,000 uninsured to gain coverage. Insurers also will be prohibited from imposing lifetime limits on benefits. The law will now forbid insurers to drop sick and costly customers after discovering technical mistakes on applications. It requires that they offer coverage to children under 26 on their parents’ policies.”

"President Obama told a Cabernet-sipping crowd of Democratic donors on Wednesday night that his more disheartened fans should give up the whine," the New York Daily News reports. "'We cannot lose heart. We cannot give up,' Obama said at the Roosevelt Hotel, where a reception and dinner shook loose $1.4 million for the party's uphill struggle in the midterm congressional elections."

Roll Call on Obama's fundraiser last night: "Obama Uses Interruptions to Underscore Rallying Cry for Party."

Today, Treasury Secretary Geithner will deliver a speech defending TARP. “This is not just our program to eulogize. The Bush Administration started the job. We finished it. And stabilizing the financial system is not just our success to tout.”

“The U.S. Congress is poised to give final approval to legislation aimed at boosting lending to small businesses in what is likely the Democrats’ final jobs bill before the Nov. 2 elections,” Bloomberg News reports. “The House is slated to vote today on a measure offering a mix of tax cuts, loans and revived stimulus provisions aimed at easing the flow of credit and signaling voters, who head to the polls in six weeks, that Democrats are trying to boost the economy. Passage would send the bill, which was approved by the Senate last week, to President Barack Obama for his signature”

"Senate Republicans defied expectations Wednesday and did not remove Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) as the senior Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee," The Hill notes.

"A Republican gay-rights group presented Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) with a leadership award Wednesday night despite his vote against a repeal of the ban on allowing openly gay people to serve in the military nearly 24 hours before the event," The Hill writes. "In an effort to build party unity around fiscal issues, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) honored Cornyn and five House Republicans - Reps. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Anh 'Joseph' Cao (R-La.), Judy Biggert (R-Ill.), and Charles Djou (R-Hawaii) – at a dinner banquet at the National Republican Club on Capitol Hill."

"When Christine O'Donnell seemingly came out of nowhere to win her party's Senate nomination in Delaware, journalists quickly unearthed a treasure trove of information about her. Their not-so-secret source: the C-SPAN Video Library," the Washington Post's Kurtz writes. "The online archive, available for free, has turned out to be a deep sea in which reporters can fish for embarrassing or revealing tidbits."

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's the reason why Karl Rove and many establishment Republicans did not want Christine O'Donnell to win last week's GOP Senate primary in Delaware.

A new CNN/Time poll finds Chris Coons (D) leading Christine O'Donnell (R) by 16 points among likely voters in Delaware's Senate race, 55%-39%.

But if Mike Castle, beaten by O'Donnell in last week's primary, were the GOP nominee, he would have an 18-point lead over Coons, 55%-37%.

That's a 34-point swing.

So that's the good news for Democrats in the new batch of CNN/Time polls. Here's the bad news: In Colorado's Senate race, Ken Buck (R) is leading Michael Bennet (D) among likelies, 49%-44%; in Pennsylvania's Senate race, Pat Toomey (R) is ahead of Joe Sestak (D) by a similar margin; and in Wisconsin, Ron Johnson (R) leads Russ Feingold (D), 51%-45%.

Yet here is the silver lining for Dems in these contests: Among registered voters, their candidates are either ahead or tied. Which means one thing: the higher the Dem turnout, the better their candidates will do.

The polls were conducted Sept. 17-21, and -- for the likely voters -- they have a margin of error of plus-minus 3.5% in CO, DE, PA, and plus-minus 3.0% in Wisconsin.

White House chief economic advisor Larry Summers’ departure from the White House raises questions from liberal and conservative bloggers on how he left and whom the White House will recruit to replace him.

Writing at conservative blog National Journal Online, J.D. Foster, senior fellow in the economics of fiscal policy at the Heritage Foundation, wondered whether Summers’ resignation, and those of other former White House advisors, was due to incompatibility with President Obama.

“Summers may win few popularity contests, but he is near universally acclaimed as one of the finest economic minds of our time. Word of his resignation raises the question: If Summers is so smart, how does one explain the administration’s economic policies?

…

It may turn out that Obama’s chief economic adviser was not Summers, or Orszag, or Romer. Perhaps all three were frustrated to learn that, from the start, Barack Obama’s chief and ultimately sole economic adviser has been Barack Obama. It would explain the frustrated departure of the illustrious three. It would explain the administration’s economic policies. And it would explain the unease of so many Americans who tell pollsters that Washington’s economic policies are fundamentally headed in the wrong direction.”

Hot Air’s Allahpundit also questioned the reasoning given for Summers’ departure.

“Supposedly, it’s because Harvard has a “strict two-year leave policy” for professors’ sabbaticals that Summers has to leave now. Really? They wouldn’t bend the rules for a former president of the university so that he can go on advising the president of the United States? If that’s true, how come we didn’t hear about Summers’s plans to leave long, long ago?”

Liberal bloggers don’t mourn Summers’ leaving. Writing that Summers helped further Obama’s “conservative economic agenda,” AMERICAblog's Chris in Paris at wrote that Summers’ replacement would not mean a change in policy.

“We may be in for an even more conservative economic agenda. Should that be the case, there's really even less reason to support this administration.”

Among the replacement candidates for Summers mentioned at the liberal OpenLeft: New York Times economic columnist Paul Krugman, economist Joseph Stiglitz, former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan and Elizabeth Warren, the new special assistant to the President and Treasury Secretary for the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

From NBC's Ken Strickland
Senate Republicans decided not to strip Sen. Lisa Murkowski of her position as the top Republican on the Energy committee, after she mounted a write-in bid for her Senate seat.

"The conference decided not to make any changes," said Sen. Richard Burr. The Conventional Wisdom going into the GOP caucus meeting was the Burr would be selected to replace Murkowski.

Senate GOP Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander refused to discuss how it all unfolded behind closed doors. "There are some things that we discussed within the conference, and we keep them there," he said moments after the meeting.

"We've done what we need to do and we decided not to do more."

Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming was picked to succeed Murkowski as Conference vice-chairman.

From Msnbc's Sarah Blackwill
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, whose write-in bid depends on Alaska voters remembering and reproducing her name on the ballot on Nov. 2nd, talked today about her first general-election campaign video which, awkwardly, misspelled her name.

In an interview on The Daily Rundown, Murkowski said the campaign video was produced by "volunteers." The original video, which spelled her campaign Web site, "LisaMurkwski.com," has since been pulled down. The director of Alaska's Division of Elections has said misspelled ballots may be counted if a voter's intent is clear.

Murkowski called her Democratic opponent, Sitka Mayor Scott McAdams, a "nice guy," who is "unelectable," and Joe Miller, the Republican who beat her in the Aug. 24th primary, "outside the mainstream."

She said that although she has stepped down from her Senate leadership position, she intends to caucus with Republicans if she's reelected.

From MSNBC's Sarah Blackwill
This morning on The Daily Rundown, Delaware's Democratic Senate nominee Chris Coons, whose race has gotten new national attention since Christine O'Donnell's upset victory, declared his independence.

A week ago, Majority Leader Harry Reid was quoted calling Coons his "pet" and his "favorite candidate."

Today, Coons called that quote "a very unfortunate choice of words by Senator Reid."

"I'm no one's pet," Coons said, "and I intend to be an independent voice in the United States Senate."

Coons also said he disagrees with administration policy on offshore drilling and the Troubled Asset Relief Fund -- the bailout of banks begun during the Bush administration which has become a popular target on the campaign trail.

The "pet" quote has already been used against Coons in attack ads -- and got a mention from O'Donnell on conservative Sean Hannity's show last night.

From Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie
As we've previously reported, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is considering departing his job, and sources tell NBC News that Emanuel MAY step down from his position as soon as October. The most logical period for Rahm to leave is right after Congress recesses, before the midterms.

There has been speculation that Emanuel will run for mayor of Chicago in 2011 (and he himself expressed interest in the office to Charlie Rose in an April interview), after current Mayor Richard Daley announced earlier this month he would not run for re-election.

What's more, there are legal reasons why Rahm would need to officially leave his federal appointee job to run. Federal law prohibits electioneering by federal government employees.

Nomination papers for the Chicago mayoral elections must be filed by Nov. 22, 2010.

While Christine O'Donnell says -- ironically on FOX News -- that she will no longer speak to the national media, Nevada GOP Senate nominee Sharron Angle once again admitted how she has been able to use conservative media outlets as an ATM in her race against Harry Reid.

At a house party earlier this month, the Las Vegas Sun reports, Angle said that she raised $236,000 from one appearance on Rush Limbaugh's radio show.

Here’s the deal: when I get a friendly press outlet -- not so much the guy that’s interviewing me -- it’s their audience that I’m trying to reach. So, if I can get on Rush Limbaugh, and I can say, “Harry Reid needs $25 million. I need a million people to send twenty five dollars to SharronAngle.com.” The day I was able to say that [even], we made $236,000 dollars. That’s why it’s so important. Somebody ... I’m going on Bill O’Reilly the 16th. They say, “Bill O’Reilly, you better watch out for that guy, he’s not necessarily a friendly”...Doesn’t matter, his audience is friendly, and if I can get an opportunity to say that at least once on his show -- when I said it on Sean Hannity’s television show we made $40,000 before we even got out of the studio in New York.

(Here's the audio, courtesy of the Las Vegas Sun.)

Of course, this isn't the first time Angle has admitted this. In an interview last month with FOX's Carl Cameron, Angle said: "When I get on a show and I say, 'Send money to SharronAngle.com,' so that your listeners will know if they want to support me that they need to go to SharronAngle.com."

And in July, she told the Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody why she preferred to speak with conservative media outlets rather than shows like "Meet the Press": "Well, in that audience will they let me say I need $25 dollars from a million people go to Sharron Angle.com send money? Will they let me say that? Will I get a bump on my website and you can watch whenever I go on to a show like that we get an immediate bump?"