“Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said Sunday that the bipartisan ‘gang of six’ Senators working on a deficit reduction plan were ready to reveal their work when Sen. Tom Coburn walked away from the talks, and he called on other Senators to join their negotiations,” Roll Call writes. “‘We were ready to announce, as far as I was concerned, and then Sen. Coburn said, ‘No, I’m not a part of this,’ and walked away,” the Illinois Democrat said on CNN’s ‘State of the Union.’ ‘The question now is whether Senators on both sides of the aisle, Democrat and Republican, will step up and say, ‘Don’t stop.’’”

“House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer will lay down his marker in the upcoming debt limit debate in a speech before the Bipartisan Policy Center on Monday,” Roll Call writes. “According to prepared remarks, the Maryland Democrat plans to call for upholding entitlement programs, cutting spending on domestic and defense programs, and enacting a trigger for automatic spending cuts and revenue raisers aimed at reducing the deficit. On the revenue side, he will propose broadening the tax base, closing tax loopholes and simplifying the income tax code.”

At AIPAC, The Hill writes of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor: “Painting in broad strokes, … Cantor (R-Va.) accused the Palestinians – and the Arab world more generally – of harboring a ‘resentment and hatred’ toward Israel that, he says, has made an accord impossible.”

Today, more than 25 national organizations -- led by the conservative-leaning National Federation of Independent Business -- are forming a coalition to stop a tax they say is in the health-care law. Per a press release, “Small business groups from across the country announced the formation of the ‘Stop the HIT’ Coalition, with the goal of repealing the costly, unfair and hidden Health Insurance Tax (HIT) that is set to take effect in 2014. The coalition, which represents small business owners, their employees and the self-employed, will generate grassroots support for repeal of the HIT by educating policymakers and activating its members who will be directly impacted by the pending tax.”

MAINE: The Portland Press Herald is no fan of Scott D’Amboise, the Tea Party primary challenger to Sen. Olympia Snowe. The paper writes, “We've yet to learn much about his fiscal philosophy, except that he's a fan of the tea party movement. But his definition of values and morals evidently allows him to pursue public office by smearing his opponent with innuendo, cheap-shot generalizations, misrepresentations and flat-out lies.”

MASSACHUSETTS: Yesterday in the Boston Globe: “Senator Scott Brown says he misspoke when he recently told a business group that he would vote for a House GOP budget plan that proposes sweeping changes to Medicare. ‘When I said last week that I was going to vote for the House GOP's plan to abolish Medicare what I really meant was I was going to vote on it -- and I have no idea yet which way I'm going to vote,’ the Massachusetts Republican said in comments reported by Talking Points Memo.” (*** UPDATE *** Brown's office says the item in Talking Points Memo was the opinion of an editor; there is no direct quote from Brown.)

Then today, he writes an op-eds Politico saying he won’t vote for the plan.

NEW YORK: Democrat Kathy Hochul leads in a Siena poll over Republican Jane Corwin, 42%-38%.

President Obama stopped by the CIA this afternoon to personally thank the analysts who helped tracked down Osama bin Laden, praising the agency for piecing together the intelligence that led to the world’s most wanted man.

Speaking to nearly 1,000 analysts and employees, the president said: “After I directed that getting bin Laden be the priority, you hunkered down even more, building on years of painstaking work; pulling together, in some cases, the slenderest of intelligence streams, running those threads to ground until you found that courier and you tracked him to that compound.”

President Obama told the audience that even though officers and analysts of the highly-secretive CIA don’t get “headlines” or “ticker-tape parades,” that they go about their work with “incredible diligence and dedication every single day.” 

The mission couldn’t have been a success, he said, without the seamless coordination across all of the nation’s intelligence agencies along with the U.S. military. A CIA spokesperson pointed out that the president’s remarks were being broadcast to all 17 agencies within the U.S. intelligence community.

Obama described the work that led to bin Laden as “one of the greatest intelligence successes in American history.” And the president said intel professionals “are going to be inspired by your achievement for generations to come.”

But the president was most appreciative for something they didn’t do: talk about the operation to track down the al Qaeda mastermind.

Obama explained, “[W]e did something really remarkable in Washington -- we kept it a secret.” 

Before addressing the crowd in the lobby of the original headquarters building at the Langley, VA complex, the president met behind closed doors with 60 analysts from various intelligence agents who were involved in the bin Laden operation. According to a CIA spokesperson, “He wanted to thank them personally for the work they’ve done over the last 10 years… Some of them have been looking for bin Laden much longer.”

As he met with his top national security team to analyze what was merely circumstantial evidence about that compound in Abbottabad, Obama said he went ahead with the raid because he had faith in the military and intelligence community.

“I put my bet on you. And now the whole world knows that that faith in you was justified,” he said.

Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro look at the candidates who are in and those who are still considering a presidential run in 2012.

Edited by Jason Seher. Produced by Jason Seher, Alexandra Moe, Ali Weinberg.

After Mike Huckabee's decision not to run for president, some of the early Conventional Wisdom suggested that it could benefit Mitt Romney. Why? Because the void in Iowa might make it easier for Romney to possibly make a surprise in Iowa, and because it removed the potential field's top communicator.

But National Journal's Ron Brownstein has a different take -- that Huck supporters could consolidate behind a more formidable GOP rival to Romney.

The reason is that with Huckabee off the field, the former Baptist minister’s core constituency—the evangelical Christians who represent nearly half of the GOP’s primary electorate—are now back in play for all competitors. If Romney can’t defang the resistance he encountered from those voters in 2008, he faces the threat that they will eventually consolidate behind another contender, such as former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, with potentially wider support than Huckabee demonstrated last time. “The risk for Romney is that some other candidate with broader appeal may attract them, someone who could stitch together a majority coalition in a way that Huckabee was not going to do,” says veteran GOP pollster Whit Ayres, who is working for potential presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman.

Obama heads to Europe... Paul Ryan's in the spotlight -- again... And do Bachmann and others get in?

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

Despite Newt Gingrich incredibly rough presidential rollout, his campaign team says that Gingrich is drawing fairly large crowds for this point in the cycle.

Spokesman Rick Tyler -- he of the "literati" statement -- tells First Read that more than 1,500 people so far have turned out to see Gingrich during his tour through Iowa.

"People are turning out in big numbers," Tyler says. "If anything the turnouts would have been bigger if the media coverage was positive and not negative." His count:

Dubuque - 130
Cedar Rapids - 97
Des Moines - 200
Mason City - 160
Waterloo - 110
Marshalltown - 178
Ames - 160
Carroll - 104
Atlantic - 75
Council Bluffs - 140
Onawa - 68
Sioux City -120

The two-plus years of the Obama presidency have featured an ideological war over the role of government -- in managing the economy, providing health care coverage, and regulating Wall Street.

But when it comes to the U.S. government ensuring food safety, there's little disagreement.

A new poll for the Pew Charitable Trusts -- conducted by Hart Research Associates (the Democratic half of the NBC/WSJ poll) and American Viewpoint (a GOP polling firm) -- finds that 85% of Americans believe the federal government should have the responsibility to make sure food is safe to eat.

In addition, 66% favor increasing funding for the federal Food and Drug Administration so it can carry out its new responsibilities under the new Food and Safety Modernization Act. And 67% agree with the statement that any price increase related to food safety likely will be less than 1% and that this small increase is worth it. That's compared with 29% who say the new requirements will drive up food costs for consumers.

The poll also finds this result: A majority of the public (53%) thinks the government should do more to solve problems and meet the needs of people, versus 42% who believe the government is doing too much.

The poll was taken of 1,015 likely voters (including 202 reached by cell phone) from April 28 to May 4. It has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.

First Read has confirmed the news that former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) will officially launch his 2012 presidential bid on Monday in Iowa.

The announcement, of course, is hardly a surprise -- given that Pawlenty has already formed a presidential exploratory committee and has been preparing for a run over much of the past year.

In addition to Monday's event in Des Moines, Pawlenty will hold a Facebook town hall and media availability in Coral Gables, FL. And on Wednesday, he will hold another media avail in DC.

Click here for a slideshow of Pawlenty.

Mitt Romney’s good week… The Dem group Priorities USA hits Romney with TV ad in South Carolina, and the Romney camp responds… The 1967 borders have become the new individual mandate -- an idea that wasn’t really controversial before Obama proposed it… Obama meets with Netanyahu at the White House, and the two make a statement to the press at 12:05 pm ET… In interview, Huntsman backs the Ryan budget plan, including the Medicare phase-out… Making sense of this week’s mayoral election in Jacksonville… The GOP’s judicial victory in NV… And Paul Ryan headlines “Meet the Press.”

*** Romney’s good week: What a difference a week can make. Last Friday, Mitt Romney was pulling out all the darts and arrows he took after his health-care speech in Michigan. This Friday, however, caps a 2012 week dominated by Newt Gingrich’s numerous missteps and even Rick Santorum’s dust-up with John McCain over torture. And the positive campaign news came from Team Romney with its announcement of raising $10 million-plus in one day. Even the fact that Democrats are attacking him with a TV ad (see below) is oddly good for him. Bottom line: Any week filled with clear displays of his strengths and others’ flaws is a good week for Romney.

*** Priorities USA hits Romney with TV ad: Tied to his Saturday visit to South Carolina, the Democratic group Priorities USA Action -- led by former Obama White House aides Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney -- is airing a TV ad aimed at Romney on Medicare and the Ryan budget plan. We’ve had our first feeding frenzy of the 2012 cycle (with Newt), our first $10 million-dollar day (with Romney), and now our first TV ad targeting a GOP 2012er this cycle. “Newt Gingrich says the Republican plan that would essentially end Medicare is too ‘radical,’ the ad goes. “Gov. Haley thinks the plan is courageous, and Gingrich shouldn't be cutting conservatives off at the knees. Mitt Romney says he's ‘on the same page’ as Paul Ryan, who wrote the plan to essentially end Medicare. But with Mitt Romney, you have to wonder...which page is he on today?” Burton, who appears on MSNBC’s “Daily Rundown” today, tells First Read the ad will run at election-year levels across the state this weekend. Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul responds, “President Obama and his team are desperate to change the subject to anything other than jobs and the millions of Americans out of work. With 9.6% unemployment in South Carolina, voters are looking for a jobs plan not a smear campaign."

*** Throwing Israel under the bus? For longtime chroniclers of the Middle East peace process, the most surprising part of President Obama’s speech yesterday was the reaction to his call for the eventual Israel-Palestine borders to be based on the 1967 lines. Israeli PM Netanyahu said it was “indefensible.” Romney fired off this statement: “President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus. He has disrespected Israel and undermined its ability to negotiate peace.” Pawlenty followed by saying it was a “mistaken and very dangerous demand.” Why was this reaction surprising? Because, as the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg writes, the 1967 lines have been the basic Middle-East-peace idea for at least the last 12 years. “This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert.”

*** The ’67 borders have become the new individual mandate: So in that respect, you could compare the 1967 lines to the individual health-care mandate or cap-and-trade -- ideas that weren’t really controversial before Obama proposed it. Also, note the difference between the tough Romney/Pawlenty statements and GOP Sen. Marco Rubio’s. In his statement, Rubio began by praising the president, and then he said this on the ’67 borders: “Unfortunately, the President’s reference to Israel’s 1967 borders marks a step back in the peace process, as the U.S. must not pre-determine the outcome of direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.” That’s a fair point -- Obama was negotiating publicly in his speech by mentioning the borders. But it’s hard to see how the president was throwing Israel “under the bus” when he also used his speech demanding that the eventual Palestinian state be “non-militarized” and questioning the Hamas-Fatah agreement. “How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist?” Obama asked. That's a "get out of negotiations" card for Israel, but apparently no one heard THAT? A truth about people who are passionate about this Middle East debate: They only hear what they don’t like.

*** Barack and Bibi: Of course, all these issues -- and many more -- will serve as the backdrop to today’s White House meeting between Obama and Netanyahu. The two meet in the Oval Office at 11:15 am ET, and they will make statements to the press at 12:05. The New York Times writes about the complicated Obama-Netanyahu relationship. “By all accounts, they do not trust each other. President Obama has told aides and allies that he does not believe that Mr. Netanyahu will ever be willing to make the kind of big concessions that will lead to a peace deal. For his part, Mr. Netanyahu has complained that Mr. Obama has pushed Israel too far.”

*** Huntsman on Obama, Libya, the stimulus, and Ryan: Jon Huntsman, who’s on the second day of his swing through New Hampshire, made some news in his interview with ABC. When he was asked to judge Obama after earlier calling him a “remarkable leader,” Huntsman replied, “History will show how effective he is.” He also criticized the U.S. involvement in Libya, saying he would have “chosen from the beginning not to intervene.” He defended his support for the stimulus -- as well as his critique that it wasn’t big enough -- by saying it “was not properly focused” on tax cuts. But the biggest news from the interview wasn’t included in the ABC package: Huntsman said he would have voted for the Ryan budget, including the phase-out of Medicare. He also said he would vote to raise the debt ceiling “if there was a corresponding level of cuts.”

*** Making sense of Jacksonville: The special congressional election in NY-26 is just four days away, and it’s receiving a considerable amount of attention from the political parties and the DC news media. But here’s something to chew on: This week’s mayoral election in Jacksonville, FL -- won by a Democrat for the first time in 20 years -- might tell us more about a swing state than whatever happens in NY-26 next week. In that race, the African-American Alvin Brown defeated conservative Republican Mike Hogan. One reason Brown won was due to the early investment from the Florida Democratic Party. “Given the political history of the city, it was a gutsy call,” Florida Democratic strategist Steve Schale tells First Read. “They drove the ship.” Another factor was ideology. “Alvin came in second in a four way primary, with two moderate GOPers falling below the run-off,” Schale adds. “The final match-up was a Tea Party Republican against a center-right Democrat. Jacksonville has a long tradition of electing center-right mayors… Alvin ended up in filling that role.” One other factor Democrats are touting, according to other strategists: New GOP Gov. Rick Scott. His numbers are worse than Obama's in this traditionally Republican city. But know this about Jacksonville: It's Republican, but not Tea Party Republican; they are Chamber-of-Commerce Republicans. 

*** The GOP’s judicial victory in NV: Meanwhile, in the upcoming special congressional election in Nevada, Republicans scored a victory when a district judge ruled against the free-for-all election that would most likely include Sharron Angle. The Las Vegas Sun: “A district judge sided today with the Republican Party, ruling against a free-for-all special election to fill the 2nd Congressional District seat of Rep. Dean Heller, who was elevated to the U.S. Senate. After a more than two-hour hearing, District Judge Todd Russell ruled the major parties have time to hold conventions and nominate one candidate to appear on the ballot. Russell said his decision will most likely be appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.”

*** Meet’s Sunday lineup: On “Meet the Press” this week, NBC’s David Gregory will interview House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan. The roundtable will consist of Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Ryan’s Democratic counterpart; Andrew Ross Sorkin; NBC’s Andrea Mitchell; and Mike Murphy. On his weekly “Press Pass,” Gregory interviewed Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough just after the president’s Middle East/North Africa speech.

*** On the 2012 trail: Gingrich today makes six stops in Iowa; Huntsman travels throughout New Hampshire; and Santorum is in Iowa… On Saturday, Herman Cain officially announces his presidential bid in Atlanta, GA; Gingrich remains in Iowa; Huntsman delivers the commencement address at Southern New Hampshire University; Romney is in South Carolina; and Santorum stays in Iowa… On Sunday, Huntsman has three more events in New Hampshire.

Countdown to NY-26 special election: 4 days
Countdown to Iowa GOP straw poll: 85 days
Countdown to NV-2 special election: 116 days
Countdown to Election Day 2011: 172 days
Countdown to the Iowa caucuses: 262 days
* Note: When the IA caucuses take place depends on whether other states move up

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 previews today’s Obama-Netanyahu meeting. “By all accounts, they do not trust each other. President Obama has told aides and allies that he does not believe that Mr. Netanyahu will ever be willing to make the kind of big concessions that will lead to a peace deal. For his part, Mr. Netanyahu has complained that Mr. Obama has pushed Israel too far — a point driven home during a furious phone call with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday morning, just hours before Mr. Obama’s speech, during which the prime minister reacted angrily to the president’s plan to endorse Israel’s pre-1967 borders for a future Palestinian state.”

“President Obama used his much-ballyhooed Mideast democracy speech Thursday to deliver an idea sure to go down poorly in Israel: make a peace deal creating a Palestinian state along the lines of 1967 pre-war borders,” the New York Daily News reports.

The New York Times: “While the 1967 borders have long been viewed as the foundation for a peace agreement, Mr. Obama’s formula of land swaps to compensate for disputed territory created a new benchmark for a diplomatic solution. Mr. Obama’s statement represented a subtle, but significant shift, in American policy.” 

The Boston Globe adds, “President Obama undermined the sensitive and delicate negotiations for Middle East peace with his outline for resumed talks between Israelis and Palestinians, the Republicans looking to unseat him charged yesterday.”

Yet lost in the coverage of the 1967 borders were these tough conditions put on the Palestinians. Said Obama: “Recognizing that negotiations need to begin with the issues of territory and security does not mean that it will be easy to come back to the table. In particular, the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel: How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist? And in the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question.”

“The early field of GOP presidential contenders has already lost three high-profile members, and with Newt Gingrich’s bid hanging by a thread, Republican activists are pressuring the unannounced to declare their intentions, in hopes of bolstering the party’s lineup,” the Boston Globe writes, adding, “An Associated Press poll this month indicated that 45 percent of GOP voters are dissatisfied with the Republican presidential field. GOP leaders worry the party will squander a chance to win the White House unless it has a candidate able to excite the Republican base and inspire grass-roots support and donations.” The potentials: Mitch Daniels, Sarah Palin, Jon Huntsman, and Michele Bachmann. There’s a “draft Jim DeMint” movement, and Rush Limbaugh wants Texas Gov. Rick Perry to run.

ROMNEY: A Suffolk poll shows Romney leading with Huckabee and Trump out of the race. He gets 20%, Sarah Palin 12%, Gingrich 9%, Giuliani 7%, Paul 5%, Bachmann 4%, Cain 4%, Daniels 4%, Pawlenty 3%, Santorum 3%.

CALIFORNIA: “California Secretary of State Debra Bowen (D) conceded Thursday that she did not receive enough votes to advance to the runoff for California’s 36th district special election,” Roll Call writes.

HAWAII: “Hawaii Rep. Mazie Hirono (D) announced Thursday she is running for the seat of retiring Democratic Sen. Daniel Akaka,” Roll Call reports.

NEVADA: “A Nevada judge ruled Thursday that political parties will be allowed to choose their nominees in the 2nd district special election, overturning an earlier decision that would have allowed an all-party free-for-all,” Roll Call writes.

NEW YORK: Andrew Cuomo’s approval rating is at 71%.

SOUTH CAROLINA: CNN announced its fourth debate of the 2012 presidential season, a Republican presidential town hall-style debate in Charleston, South Carolina on Jan. 19, 2012.

From NBC’s Ali Weinberg and Libby Leist

President Obama made his most explicit call for the Middle East peace process to be based on a Palestinian state and Israel's return to its pre-1967 boundaries.

While the speech at the State Department was billed as one on policy toward the Middle East and North Africa, places undergoing democratic upheaval and brutal crackdowns, the president made his most notable remarks on the long-standing gridlock between Israel and the Palestinians.

Obama said Israeli-Palestinian negotiations should also involve "mutually agreed swaps" of land, in which Israel retains areas in the West Bank where Jewish settlements have been established. This would ensure that "secure and recognized borders are established for both states," Obama said.

"What America and the international community can do is state frankly what everyone knows: a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples," Obama said, while acknowledging that it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians themselves to make a lasting peace a reality.

Not much movement, however, is expected toward a solution in the near future. The president purposefully did not lay out any timeline or specific demands, but instead stuck to principles he has previously laid out. Israel has signaled it is cautious about any kind of peace agreement that could jeopardize its stability, particularly during a time when the Middle East is in upheaval. Additionally, the hard-line administration of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as a Palestinian Authority government that includes Hamas, complicates matters.

“[T]he recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel,” Obama said. “How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist? And in the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question.”

Obama's words came just a day before he is set to meet with Netanyahu, who issued a statement shortly after the speech, saying that Israel would reject any return to "indefensible" borders, a suggestion that a return to pre-1967 borders would compromise Israel's security.

"That is why Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004," the statement read, alluding to a letter then-President George W. Bush wrote to then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon saying that it would be "unrealistic" for Israel to abandon all its settlements given the "already existing major Israeli populations centers" in the West Bank.

President Obama's speech indicated not a shift in policy but in bluntness. He has previously stated the administration's goals of a return to the 1967 borders but has couched his statements in perhaps more diplomatic terms, like he did when announcing the resumption of Middle East peace talks in September 2010. He said then that his vision of peace was "a settlement, negotiated between the parties, that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security with a Jewish state of Israel and its other neighbors."

The speech was an instant lightning rod for both Republican members of congress and presidential candidates.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a key Republican on the Armed Services and Appropriations committees, said President Obama made a mistake in calling for a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders.

“Anytime our President singles out an issue, it makes it more difficult in my view to have a comprehensive negotiation, so i quite frankly think it was a mistake," he told reporters.

And Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) condemned the President for calling so specifically for negotiations to hinge on a return to pre-1967 borders, saying the statement was “a substantial shift towards the Palestinian side” because “words matter in Middle Eastern policy.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), who is also contemplating a presidential run, tweeted, “Obama's call for 1967 borders will cause chaos, division & more aggression in Middle East & put Israel at further risk.”

Likely presidential candidate Mitt Romney released a statement shortly after the speech saying the president “has thrown Israel under the bus, and that he “violated a first principle of American foreign policy, which is to stand firm by our friends.”

The individual mandate used to be the new black – even within Republican circles.

In the early 1990s, the conservative Heritage Foundation floated health care requirements similar to those that require drivers to get liability insurance. Republican Sen. John Chafee of Rhode Island put forward a GOP plan that would require all U.S. residents to be covered under a health plan except those exempted for religious reasons.

And several big thinkers who would be interested in running for president two decades later also liked the sound of it.

Heritage and other conservative bigs later pronounced the individual mandate unlawful and ineffective, and judicial scholars are now in the throes of debate over whether the requirement is even Constitutional under the Commerce Clause. But past Republican approval of the individual mandate – often phrased as a matter of ‘personal responsibility’ – planted the seeds of what is now playing out as an internecine struggle among Republicans eying the Oval Office.

Last week, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney used a lengthy speech and a PowerPoint presentation to explain his embrace of an individual mandate in the health care plan he signed into law in 2006. (Romney believes that such a mandate at the state level was appropriate under the 10^th amendment, although his proposal to repeal and replace the Obama-passed law now would not involve a similar requirement.)

The requirement may cause headaches for Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels as well, if he decides to launch a presidential bid. On Thursday, the Huffington Post unearthed a 2003 newspaper article in which Daniels said he favored a “universal health care system” that would “make it mandatory for all Americans to have health insurance.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has faced the most sustained criticism on this point since Sunday, when he stated on NBC’s Meet the Press that “all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care.”  Gingrich made the comment after host David Gregory showed a clip from 1993 in which Gingrich said he was for a plan “exactly like automobile insurance – individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance.”

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh challenged Gingrich on Thursday to explain those and subsequent comments that have been supportive of the requirement that almost all U.S. residents buy health insurance.

The former Speaker responded that the Republican party has gone through “a long evolution” on the subject since the early 1990s.

“In 1993, we were narrowly focused on trying to beat the Hillarycare project,” he said in reference to the Clinton-backed health care overhaul that ultimately disintegrated in Congress. “We weren’t thinking fundamentally about resetting the country.”

Gingrich says now that he opposes mandates at the state and the federal level.

“I do not believe any state should adopt a mandate,” he said.  “I think there are ways to solve the problem without a mandate. But we’re trying to solve three things: Preserve American freedom, ensure that people can have health care, and have some sense of responsibility that if you do get health care, you ought to pay for it.”

Gingrich pushes back on Ryan reference
On Limbaugh’s radio program, Gingrich also pushed back at the notion that he linked Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan to “right-wing social engineering” – a phrase he uttered on Meet the Press that later prompted the former Speaker to call Ryan personally to apologize.

“It was not a reference to Paul Ryan,” Gingrich said. “There was no reference to Paul Ryan in that answer."

Here’s the transcript to the portion of the Meet the Press interview:

 MR. GREGORY: What about entitlements? The Medicare trust fund, in stories that have come out over the weekend, is now going to be depleted by 2024, five years earlier than predicted. Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors...

REP. GINGRICH: Right.

MR. GREGORY: ...some premium support and--so that they can go out and buy private insurance?

REP. GINGRICH: I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don't think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate. I think we need a national conversation to get to a better Medicare system with more choices for seniors. But there are specific things you can do. At the Center for Health Transformation, which I helped found, we published a book called "Stop Paying the Crooks." We thought that was a clear enough, simple enough idea, even for Washington. We--between Medicare and Medicaid, we pay between $70 billion and $120 billion a year to crooks. And IBM has agreed to help solve it, American Express has agreed to help solve it, Visa's agreed to help solve it. You can't get anybody in this town to look at it. That's, that's almost $1 trillion over a decade. So there are things you can do to improve Medicare.

MR. GREGORY: But not what Paul Ryan is suggesting, which is completely changing Medicare.

REP. GINGRICH: I, I think that, I think, I think that that is too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the--I don't want to--I'm against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.

A first for President Obama's term in office: Republicans derailed his nominee for the federal bench.
 
The president's choice for 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Goodwin Liu, was blocked by the Senate after failing to reach the needed 60 votes to invoke cloture and proceed to a vote on the nomination itself.

Liu is a 39-year-old professor of law at University of California at Berkeley, and Republicans call him an ideologue who they believe would become a judicial activist if confirmed for the bench. Democrats pointed out the Liu received a wide range of endorsements. Liu had testified against the nominations of Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito.

Even GOP Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham -- who had been part of the so-called Gang of 14 that negotiated a deal to prevent judicial filibusters and defer to a president's choice except in "extraordinary cases" -- voted against Liu.

Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski broke with her party to support Liu's nomination. 

Democrats needed seven Republicans to join them.

Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum will make his 14th trip to Iowa this weekend since he began courting GOP voters for the 2012 election. With a recent Gallup poll showing the conservative former Pennsylvania senator placing eighth among potential Republican primary contenders, his campaign officials say they're hoping that return trips to early primary states -- like one to Iowa this weekend -- will help raise his name ID among GOP voters.

But Santorum's visits highlight a larger trend with his campaign: He is currently outpacing every other Republican contender when it comes to travelling.

While Jon Huntsman today is in New Hampshire and Newt Gingrich is in Iowa, Santorum is the far and away the travel leader -- logging 16 trips to New Hampshire, 14 trips to South Carolina, and another 14 to Iowa, according to his campaign.   

Some of these Santorum trips came before the New Year. Since Jan. 1, NBC News has kept these numbers on the GOP candidates’ travel: 

Bachmann - 3 to Iowa, 6 to NH, 2 to SC, 1 to FL, 1 overseas
Cain - 9 to Iowa, 6 to NH, 4 to SC, 2 to FL, 1 to MI, 1 to NV
Gingrich - 5 to IA, 5 to NH, 6 to SC, 2 to FL
Huntsman - 1 to SC, 1 to FL, heads to NH today
Paul - 5 to IA, 3 to NH, 1 to SC, 1 to FL, 2 to NV
Pawlenty - 8 to IA, 4 to NH, 2 to SC, 4 to FL
Romney - 5 to NH, 3 to FL, 1 to MI, 3 to NV, 1 overseas
Santorum - 5 to IA, 9 to NH, 7 to SC, 1 to FL, 1 to NV

By now, it shouldn't be a surprise that House Republicans are against raising the debt ceiling -- unless it's joined by a significant effort to reduce spending.

But it is surprising when one GOP member says that defaulting on the debt and going through "a period of crisis" could actually be a good thing. California Congressman Devin Nunes (R) said in an interview:

“By defaulting on the debt, in the short and long term, it could benefit us to go through a period of crisis that forces politicians to make decisions” on major policies that affect the budget, he told POLITICO.

Reached for comment to explain how a period of crisis could be beneficial, Nunes spokesman Andrew House tells First Read that the congressman concedes "there would be turmoil" associated with a default. But Nunes believes that the turmoil will force Congress to make decisions to reduce the debt, ending the "idea that you can kick the can down the road."

"It would have our government making decisions that would be beneficial," House adds.

Previewing Obama’s speech on the Middle East and North Africa at 11:40 am ET… Change cannot happen overnight, but sometimes it occurs faster than anyone might think… The speech will likely have three planks: 1) an economic carrot for nations undergoing democratic transition, 2) a discussion of the Syrias and Saudi Arabias who aren’t undergoing transition, and 3) the tricky Middle East peace process… When in trouble on the 2012 trail, blame the media… Huntsman heads to NH… Dem group hearts Daniels on health care… DNC puts out video on the right’s new litmus test (Ryan’s budget plan)… And Coburn speaks.

*** Now this is change: When President Obama delivered his major foreign-policy address in Cairo in June 2009 (on the Middle East and the Muslim world), he mentioned something he's said many times before: "Change cannot happen overnight." But it sometimes happens faster than anyone might think. Nearly two years since that speech, Egypt's Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali are gone in the wake of the Arab Spring; civil war -- aided by the U.S. and NATO -- rages on in Libya; Syria has violently squashed popular protests; and Osama bin Laden is dead. Of course, other topics that Obama discussed in that Cairo speech haven't changed. Guantanamo Bay hasn't closed, as the president promised. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is far from over. And the war in Afghanistan continues even after bin Laden's death. But what the president called for in that speech was a new beginning. “I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world.” 

*** The economic carrot: At 11:40 am ET from the U.S. State Department, Obama delivers another speech -- billed by some as “Cairo II” -- on what comes next after this new beginning. Per senior administration officials, the presidential will announce economic aid to Egypt, Tunisia, and other Middle Eastern/North African nations in transition. “One of the most important areas for us to focus on is supporting positive economic growth that … can incentivize and reinforce those countries that are transitioning to democracy,” an administration official said on a conference call.” Interestingly enough, this economic aid is modeled after what the U.S. did in Central and Eastern Europe after the Soviet Union fell.

*** On the Syrias and Saudi Arabias: In addition to economic aid, another part of Obama’s speech will concern the nations that are not transitioning to democracy -- from the Syrias (which are squashing the popular protests) to the Saudi Arabias (which appear to be dragging their feet). Strikingly, one of the messages that Obama will deliver here is what he said in Cairo in ’09: Change doesn’t happen overnight. Yet here is also what the president said in that speech two years ago: “You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion. You must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise. You must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party.”

*** On Middle East peace: A final plank of Obama’s speech, of course, will involve the Middle East peace process, especially with the president’s meeting tomorrow with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. From what we can tell, Obama will outline PRINCIPLES but not SPECIFICS or a TIMELINE for Middle East peace. As the Washington Post writes, “A more general statement would mark a victory for national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon and Vice President Biden, who have long professional histories with Middle East adviser Dennis B. Ross, a veteran of the Clinton administration’s peace efforts. Ross favors giving Israel more time to assess the region’s changing politics before adding new pressure to return to negotiations.” Here’s a reality: There is no incentive for either the Israelis or the Palestinians to cut a deal right now; Look at the instability in the countries that border Israel, and ask yourself if there would be domestic political will to cut a deal. Long term, it looks like it makes sense from the standpoint of the U.S. and Europe. But the peace process is not a global issue for the Israeli political system; it's local.

*** When in trouble, blame the media: Turning to the 2012 election… The excuse of last resort is always media bias. And that is precisely what Team Newt alleged yesterday after an incredibly rough last 72 hours. Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler fired off this bizarre statement to Huffington Post: “The literati sent out their minions to do their bidding. Washington cannot tolerate threats from outsiders who might disrupt their comfortable world… They fired timidly at first, then the sheep not wanting to be dropped from the establishment’s cocktail party invite list unloaded their entire clip, firing without taking aim their distortions and falsehoods. Now they are left exposed by their bylines and handles.” But here’s a simple truth: The media that Team Newt needs to blame isn’t the so-called MSM; rather it’s the conservative echo chamber (Limbaugh, Krauthammer, FOX). Irony of ironies? The man who is perhaps the leading media critic on conservative circles, Brent Bozell, isn't exactly taking it easy on Newt in this column.

*** Focusing on Huntsman: Gingrich, by the way, makes five stops in Iowa today (Waterloo, Marshalltown, Ames, Carroll, and Atlantic). And the other major activity on the early 2012 campaign trail today comes from Jon Huntsman, who begins his debut trip to New Hampshire with an event in Hanover, NH. Politico previews Huntsman’s five-day swing through the Granite State. “[F]ive months after floating himself as a potential presidential candidate -- and several weeks after leaving his post in Beijing -- Huntsman remains a political cipher. He has scarcely spoken in public, delivering a single commencement speech and giving an extended interview to just one publication.” A Huntsman spokesman tells First Read that the former governor and ambassador will focus on getting the country’s fiscal house in order. “He knows how to do it: Utah was rated best managed, best state for business, best for tax policy,” the spokesman says. “They weathered recession growing jobs and maintaining a rainy day fund.”

*** Dems heart Daniels on health care? The other 2012 activity today comes from Mitch Daniels, who spoke this morning before the St. Joseph County Chamber of Commerce breakfast in South Bend, IN. Speaking of Daniels, the Democratic-leaning group Protect Your Care -- which focuses on health care -- is highlighting how Daniels’ Indiana is implementing the health-care law and is accepting federal funds under the law. “Daniels’ assistance in implementing the Affordable Care Act is especially welcome when contrasted with the actions of Governors Perry, Scott and Jindal to block it at behest of the Tea Party,” said Protect Your Care spokesman Eddie Vale. Here’s more evidence – beyond Romney -- how Democrats are hoping to create friction in the GOP primary on health care.

*** More on the right’s new litmus test: As we wrote on Tuesday, the Ryan budget’s overhaul of Medicare has become the ultimate conservative litmus test. And after the flak Gingrich has received for opposing the Medicare overhaul -- and then apologizing for that opposition -- the DNC has released a video today seizing on this litmus test. Says a DNC spokesperson: “If there’s one lesson we learned from the ferocity with which Republicans attacked their supposed ‘ideas man’ and the speed with which he caved, it’s that dismantling Medicare is the new litmus test for any would-be Republican presidential nominee.”  

*** Coburn speaks: Turning to Capitol Hill, Sen. Tom Coburn pens a Washington Post op-ed to explain (in part) why he walked away from the “Gang of Six” working on deficit reduction. “It is not realistic to expect six members to pull the Senate out of its dysfunction and lethargy. Some will ask why we should have more hope in an open, deliberative process, in which all senators are engaged, when a dedicated few did not succeed. The America I know comes together when tough times call for us to do so. It’s time for the Senate to earn its reputation as the world’s greatest deliberative body and help lead that effort.” But this is worth noting: Coburn’s op-ed does NOT pledge against any tax hikes; in fact, his praise of the Bowles-Simpson recommendations probably won’t make Grover Norquist happy.

Countdown to NY-26 special election: 5 days
Countdown to Iowa GOP straw poll: 86 days
Countdown to NV-2 special election: 117 days
Countdown to Election Day 2011: 173 days
Countdown to the Iowa caucuses: 263 days
* Note: When the IA caucuses take place depends on whether other states move up

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 will declare that the U.S. is firmly in support of democracy in the Arab world in a major speech Thursday intended to show administration policy has caught up with rapidly unfolding events in the Middle East,” The Hill writes. “White House officials on Wednesday touted Obama’s address as ‘beginning to turn the page to a more positive and hopeful future for U.S. policy in the region,’ following the killing of terrorist Osama bin Laden and the near completion of the drawdown of American troops in Iraq. As if to underscore its ‘change’ credentials, the administration on Wednesday froze the assets of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and other officials in the Damascus regime. It also put new pressure on Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh to sign an agreement that would force him out of power within a month.”

The Boston Globe’s editorial page: “As Obama prepares to make his second major speech aimed at the Muslim world, following his 2009 Cairo speech, people in the Middle East and beyond want to know just how far the United States will go to remove regimes that violate the human rights of their own people. Obama has attempted to answer that question with his actions — but the message has been muddled. Now, he should try to put it into words: The United States strongly supports the aspirations of those seeking democratic reform in the Arab world, but it can’t impose such changes from the outside. It has to deal with the world as it is, not as it wants it to be. It will be a force for human rights, but regime change should come from within.”

The Washington Post on the Middle East/North Africa challenges for Obama: “President Obama is facing pressure from key allies to act more decisively on several volatile issues in the Middle East and North Africa, including the armed rebellion in Libya, the uprising in Syria, and the moribund peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Obama “paid a quick but rewarding visit to Boston yesterday, rallying supporters at a pair of fund-raisers to energize a Democratic stronghold and bolster his campaign coffers,” the Boston Globe says.

“Democrats evaluating the 2012 map are confident President Barack Obama can win enough battleground states to earn a second term, but via a far less aggressive path than what he forged in 2008,” Roll Call reports, adding, “A Democratic official familiar with the still-forming re-election campaign told Roll Call that the focus will be on holding the 2008 pickups of Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina, winning over Latino voters in the West and flooding the traditional swing states of Ohio and Florida with resources. The Democrats feel good about winning New Mexico and Nevada, especially given the population growth among Hispanics.”

BACHMANN: “Our phones have been ringing off the hook," Bachmann told Fox. "Our Facebook has been lit up. Our donations are pouring in, and people are saying 'Michele, jump in. We want you to run. … We had announced earlier that we would be looking at a June entry date for a decision one way or another about this race. Possibly we may move that up.” The New York Daily News writes: “Her statements are the clearest indication yet that Bachmann is leaning toward a ‘yes’ decision and come as sources close to Bachmann say she's more likely to run now that Huckabee, who caters to the same social-conservative base, has pulled out.”

CAIN: Those voters who know Herman Cain think very highly of him, the Daily Caller notes of a new Gallup poll. “Cain, who only has a 29 percent name recognition according to Gallup, has a positive intensity score of 24, higher than any other candidate that Gallup polls. Michele Bachmann has the second highest score of 21.”

The Daily Caller also learns about Gloria Cain, Herman Cain’s wife, who Cain says is not looking for the limelight. “Cain — who is expected to formally announce his bid for president Saturday at an Atlanta rally — said she’ll appear ‘selectively with me at certain times as it relates to this campaign.’ He also said she has an implanted heart device, which cuts down on the stamina she may have to stump across the country.”

CHRISTIE: “According to a new poll from Monmouth University/NJ Press Media, 47 percent of New Jersey residents approve of Christie while 49 percent disapprove -- a gap well within the poll's margin of error,” the Wall Street Journal writes. “But the trendlines show the governor holding steady with supporters while undecided residents are moving into the anti-Christie camp. Since Monmouth's last poll, conducted in February, disapproving respondents swelled by nine percentage points. Those with no opinion dropped by seven points.”

GINGRICH: “Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) is considering a return to the Sunday shows this weekend to help undo the damage caused by his appearance last week,” The Hill reports. (But not Meet the Press.) Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler said, "The firefight started when the cowardly sensed weakness. They fired timidly at first, then the sheep, not wanting to be dropped from the establishment’s cocktail-party invite list, unloaded their entire clip, firing without taking aim their distortions and falsehoods. Now, they are left exposed by their bylines and handles." He added that Gingrich had "emerged ... once again ready to lead those who won’t be intimidated by the political elite."

“While early gaffes, misstatements and blunders in strategy can swiftly cement an unhelpful narrative, they are not always deadly to a campaign,” the New York Times writes of Newt Gingrich’s missteps in recent days, listing a number of candidates who made early mistakes, some of whom dropped out but some of whom went on to win their party’s nomination.

HUNTSMAN: Jon Huntsman begins his first trip to New Hampshire today, with a stop at a meet-and-greet in Hanover today, the Boston Globe reports.

Huntsman will base his campaign out of Orlando, Florida, the New York Times writes. “Florida quickly became a leading choice, aides said, because of its critical role in the Republican primary — and general election — and because Orlando is the hometown of his wife, Mary Kaye Huntsman. Aides briefly discussed locating the campaign in New Hampshire or South Carolina, but concluded that it would make Mr. Huntsman look like a one-state candidate.”

ROMNEY: The Romney campaign has snagged attorney and businesswoman Susan Duprey, a key member of John McCain’s 2008 New Hampshire steering committee, the New Hampshire Union-Leader’s DiStaso reports.

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said he will stop in South Carolina on Saturday with a trip to the Columbia area, the AP reports. Romney is also planning to announce a South Carolina staff hire today.

President Obama took a shot at Romney last night at a fundraiser in Bosotn, the Boston Herald reports. “While urging the crowd to instead look at his accomplishments, Obama took the time to tweak potential GOP rival Mitt Romney, who passed a health care law that set the groundwork for Obama’s national reform. ‘With a little assist from the former governor of Massachusetts we passed universal health care,’ Obama said.”

Republicans’ bill to expand offshore oil production failed, 42-57.

Crack that whip (or not): “Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) is leaving Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget plan to its own fate in the Senate by not whipping his GOP colleagues on the vote,” The Hill writes. “Republican senators say McConnell has made it clear he will vote for the House Budget Committee chairman’s plan, but has said rank-and-file members should vote as they want on the 2012 budget proposal.”

Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) weighed in yesterday about the defection of Tom Coburn from the so-called Gang of Six, NBC’s Libby Leist reports. McCaskill, who is up for re-election in 2012, said she has some sympathy for Coburn who was under enormous pressure from anti-tax conservatives. "I feel for him. I take shots from the far left and the far right almost everyday. So, it’s hard to get those compromises," she said.

McCaskill added she feels some of the same resistance from her own party on the issue of entitlement reform. "There's way too much pressure on our side of the aisle about not mentioning the word Social Security or talking about means testing in Medicare. I believe very much we can't afford to buy Warren Buffet's prescription drugs anymore ...but there's pressure being exerted on both sides."

NEW YORK: Stu Rothenberg writes in Roll Call: “Republican strategists are now praying that they never, ever have another special election in New York state: “‘If we win,’ says one Republican following the race closely, ‘the media will treat the outcome as irrelevant. If we lose, it will be seen as cataclysmic for us.’” More: “Republicans tend to dismiss the idea that a strong Hochul showing would reflect the potency of her efforts to connect Corwin to the Ryan budget and Ryan’s proposal to dramatically change Medicare. But even if they are right, Democrats can take heart from the fact that Obama’s shadow didn’t destroy Hochul’s candidacy before the race even began.”

WISCONSIN: The Club for Growth is taking aim at Tommy Thompson and says it would oppose his likely bid for Senate.

In a radio interview this afternoon, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum tried to end the back-and-forth between him and GOP Sen. John McCain over so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. Calling from an Amtrak train headed to his next campaign stop, Santorum told conservative radio host Steve Malzberg that he respects McCain’s opinion on the issue, but remains convinced those interrogation methods are effective in obtaining information from high value detainees.

"I feel nothing ill towards John McCain," Santorum said. "I respect his opinion. But I think he's wrong."

The spat between the two men when McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam, penned a Washington Post op-ed arguing that Osama bin Laden’s death can’t be traced to waterboarding or other forms of torture to get information from terror suspects. McCain later took to the Senate floor and, in an impassioned speech, argued against the abusing prisoners to siphon intelligence.

"In my personal experience, the abuse of prisoners sometimes produces good intelligence, but often produces bad intelligence," McCain said. "Under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear -- whether it is true or false -- if he believes it will relieve his suffering." 

That drew a response from Santorum, who said on Hugh Hewitt's radio program that McCain did not "understand how enhanced interrogation works."

Those close to McCain felt Santorum's assertion was insensitive. Longtime adviser Mark Salter wrote on his Facebook page: "Ron Paul may be the wackiest candidate in the GOP field. But for pure, blind stupidity, nobody beats Santorum. In my 20 years in the Senate, I never met a dumber member, which he reminded me of today." 

McCain's press secretary parried questions about the former Pennsylvania senator's remarks while daughter Meghan McCain took to Twitter to defend her father.

After this dust-up, Santorum released a statement to NBC News saying that while he disagreed with McCain’s views on the usefulness of enhanced interrogation techniques, he stressed that he never questioned the Arizona senator’s record of military service or personal integrity. 

"For anyone to infer my disagreement with Sen. McCain's policy position lessens my respect for his service to our country and all he had to endure is outrageous and unfortunate," Santorum said.

From msnbc.com's Tom Curry:
On some big issues, Barack Obama’s presidency remains up in the air: for example, the fate of the health care overhaul awaits a Supreme Court decision, probably next year.

But Obama’s judicial appointments will make an imprint that will endure long after he leaves the White House.

In addition to his two Supreme Court picks, the Senate has confirmed 18 of Obama’s appeals court nominees. That compares with 23 of George W. Bush’s appeals court nominees confirmed at the same point in his first term as president.

“There’s been a definite improvement; it was somewhat slow start for the administration in focusing on judicial nominations. That’s clearly attributable to the very heavy legislative load they had in the first couple of years,” said Caroline Frederickson, the head of the American Constitution Society, a progressive advocacy group.

“The president has been reasonably successful in confirming circuit court (appeals court) nominees and is on par with his predecessors,” said Nan Aron, head of the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group. “He’s lagging significantly in the district (trial) courts, though, leaving gaping holes in the judiciary and hampering the ability of Americans to receive justice.”

Obama’s most controversial appeals court nominee, Goodwin Liu, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, faces a vote on his nomination Thursday.

Sixty votes are needed to end debate on the Liu nomination and bring it to a final vote.

Republican senators – some of whom fought hard against Democratic filibusters of Bush’s judicial nominees six years ago – will decide whether to block a vote on Liu.

Two weeks ago, the Senate by a vote of 63 to 33 decided to end debate and move to the confirmation of John McConnell, an Obama nominee for a lower federal court vacancy in Rhode Island, despite vehement opposition from business groups.

The 11 Republican senators who voted to end a filibuster of McConnell may be a clue to the vote Thursday on Liu. “I was hoping it reflected the fact that they had reverted to the principles they stated during the Bush administration: that nominees deserve up or down votes, and that ‘elections have consequences’ and that ‘advise and consent’ is not ‘advise and obstruct.’ We’ll have to see whether or not that will be true with the vote on Goodwin (Liu),” said Frederickson, a Liu ally.

Liu formerly served on the American Constitution Society board.

Worth watching Thursday will be four GOP senators who signed a bipartisan accord in 2005 to not use filibusters to block votes on judicial nominees except in undefined “extraordinary circumstances.” The four are: Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine.

Graham said in a statement Thursday he'd vote to sustain the filibuster of Liu. He cited Liu's 2006 Senate testimony against Samuel Alito, whom Bush had nominated for the Supreme Court. In his testimony Liu said, "Judge Alito's record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse. ... This is not the America we know."

Liu told senators last year that he regretted that testimony because it was "unduly harsh" and "hurtful to the nominee." 

But that apology wasn’t enough for Graham, who said Thursday, "His outrageous attack on Judge Alito convinced me that Goodwin Liu is an ideologue. His statement showed he has nothing but disdain for those who disagree with him. ... This episode -- along with his out of the mainstream writings -- requires me to take the extraordinary step of voting no on cloture."

In one way this battle resembles the Miguel Estrada filibuster battle of 2003-2004. Estrada was a brilliant young lawyer whom Democrat blocked after Bush tried to put him on the appeals court for the District of Columbia circuit. Some saw Estrada as a Supreme Court justice in the making.

Now some court watchers see Liu as a potential high court nominee, looking ahead to possible retirements for Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 78, Antonin Scalia, 75, and Anthony Kennedy, who turns 75 in July.

As for the effect of the Obama appeals court judges who has been confirmed so far, Aron said, “It’s way too early to make definitive statements about the impact of Obama nominees, but we can get a hint from the health care cases being heard, for instance, in the 4^th Circuit, where the Obama-nominated judges seemed to approach the arguments differently from the Republican appointees.”