Following up on the last post I wrote about Taylor Marsh's response to those who think she's blogging for Hillary, I have a few thoughts of my own on how bloggers, particularly TalkLeft, covers campaigns.

I have long said that Hillary and John Edwards are my two favorite Democratic candidates. I haven't endorsed either yet and like most bloggers, probably won't before the first primaries. Any of the Democratic candidates will have my support if they win and there are none (except perhaps Joe Biden) I would be unhappy with.

All of the candidates' campaigns send out press releases and e-mails on issues, news and events to bloggers daily. I write about those that strike a chord with me on that particular day.

Like Taylor, I'm covering the 2008 election, not a single candidate. I write about Hillary the most because so far she is the most interesting candidate. She also has great campaign outreach through Peter Daou, her Internet communications director. He doesn't flood our e-mail boxes with every possible soundbite, but knows the individual blogs well enough only to send each those items he thinks would be of interest. As to what he sends TalkLeft, he's always on the mark.

No candidate is going to match my positions on issues or focus on those I care most about.

More...

The big issue on the John Edwards segment of Meet the Press was leaving residual troops in Iraq.

Bill Richardson says he won't leave any. John Edwards says he'll leave non-combat troops there to protect the embassy workers and he'll put combat troops in Kuwait in case they're needed to fight al- Qaeda.

Edwards says Hillary will leave combat-ready troops inside Iraq while he'll leave them across the Kuwait border.

I don't know Obama's position since there were no Obama questions during the interview.

Personally, I tend to think Richardson's position is best, just get out and get out now.

Via Think Progress:

Not clear what Novak means by "weird conduct." But this does demonstrate the conundrum the GOP is in regarding Larry Craig. On the record, there is a conviction for disorderly conduct. Clearly that is not the problem. The problem is the suggestion of homosexuality. Is that the "weird conduct" Novak is talking about? Is it the seeking of anonymous sex in public places? Or is it something else? Something Foley-like? Remember Craig's unsolicited denial of involvement in the Congressional page scandal of the early 1980s? What did the GOP know and when did it know it?

Update [2007-10-3 17:4:47 by Big Tent Democrat]: Jane gets it.

Via Matt Yglesias and Kevin Drum, Here is my problem:

A list of the national security and foreign policy advisers to the leading presidential candidates from both parties.

DEMOCRATS

Hillary Clinton

. . . Michael O'Hanlon, Brookings senior fellow and former Congressional Budget Office defense and foreign policy analyst, supporter

Michael O'Hanlon? The Iraq Debacle supporter, surge supporter, and serial dissembler on his support for the war? Why would Senator Clinton want the support of someone who has diametrically opposed views from hers on the most important foreign policy issue of the day? Indeed, why in heavens is O'Hanlon supporting her?

Can you imagine a campaign against a Republican who can cite Hillary Clinton advisor Michale O'Hanlon on how Hillary is wrong about the Iraq War and the Surge? This makes no sense. Hillary should immediately renounce O'Hanlon's support and frankly, it is hard to fathom why he is supporting her. They completely disagree on the most important issue of the day. Blatant careerism I suppose.

I speak for me only as usual and I am a supporter of the Chris Dodd candidacy for the PResidency.

Chris Dodd's campaign is based on one major issue - that the leadership we will want in our next President is demonstrated by the leadership a candidate shows now on the major issues of the day. The biggest issue is, of course, Iraq, and Chris Dodd is fighting to insure a Democratic Congress does not fund the Iraq War without a date certain for ending the war. This fight is attracting notice in Iowa:

Yepsen: 1st-tier Dems' timidity on Iraq may create opening

Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd is the longest of long-shot candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination. But he doesn't seem too agitated about that. He's an experienced politician. He knows how the caucus game often breaks late. Because of his 33 years of experience in Congress, he also knows something about U.S. foreign policy and the war in Iraq.

He does get agitated about that, particularly when the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination appear to be in no big hurry to get out. Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama all declined in last week's debate to say they'd have U.S. troops out of Iraq by the end of their first term - in 2013. "I was stunned, literally stunned" to hear them say that, Dodd said in an interview for last weekend's Iowa Press program on Iowa Public Television."It was breathtaking to me that the so-called three leading candidates would not make that commitment. That's six years from today." . . .MORE

In an interview published Saturday, Republican presidential hopeful John McCain said we are a Christian nation and he prefers a President of the Christian faith.

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles ... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith."

.... He added that "the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation."

Jewish groups roundly criticized him. The American Jewish Committee released a statement:

McCain should know that the United States is a democratic society without a religious test for public office.

"To argue that America is a Christian nation, or that persons of a particular faith should by reason of their faith not seek high office, puts the very character of our country at stake," Jeffrey Sinensky, the group's general counsel, said Monday in a statement.

Who came to McCain's defense? Joe Lieberman. And of course, McCain is now backtracking.

More...

I'm gonna live blog the Democratic Presidential Debate taking place this evening at Dartmouth College. Or at least as long as I can stand it. It will be broadcast on MSNBC. It starts at 9.

Predict who you think will have a big night tonight. Here's my prediction - Chris Dodd goes after Hillary and Obama on the Iran resolution passed today by the Senate and will press Biden to commit to not funding the Iraq Debacle. Leadership NOW!

Yawn:

The G.O.P. has spent the last 40 years insulting, disenfranchising and otherwise stomping on the interests of black Americans. Last week, the residents of Washington, D.C., with its majority black population, came remarkably close to realizing a goal they have sought for decades — a voting member of Congress to represent them.

. . . This is the party of the Southern strategy — the party that ran, like panting dogs, after the votes of segregationist whites who were repelled by the very idea of giving equal treatment to blacks. Ronald Reagan, George H.W. (Willie Horton) Bush, George W. (Compassionate Conservative) Bush — they all ran with that lousy pack.

More...

David Brooks writes a love letter to Mark Penn:

Clinton has established this lead by repudiating the netroots theory of politics. . . . But Clinton has relied on Mark Penn, the epitome of the sort of consultant the netroots reject, and Penn’s approach has been entirely vindicated by the results so far.

. . . [T]he netroots are losing the policy battles. . . . Democratic domestic policy is now being driven by old Clinton hands like Gene Sperling and Bruce Reed.

And while Clinton may not go out of her way to offend the MoveOn types, on her TV rounds on Sunday she made it obvious that she’s not singing their tune. On “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” Clinton could have vowed to vacate Iraq. Instead, she delivered hawkish mini-speeches that few Republicans would object to.

Is Brooks right? Hardly. Take Iraq for instance. Hillary said:

I have voted against funding this war, and I will vote against funding this war as long as it takes.

This is contra to every bit of advice given by Mark Penn and the DLC. As for other policy issues, it would be interesting to know which ones Brooks thinks Hillary is moving away from the Netroots on. Universal health insurance? Global warming? Brooks has let his hatred of bloggers cloud his judgment. More.

Clyde Haberman in the New York Times piles on about Rudy Giuliani's wierdness, a trait he says is well known to New Yorkers and the rest of us are getting to see for the first time.

New Yorkers are well acquainted with at least one other version. That would be Rudy the loopy. The weirdness factor, as some have called it, is as much a part of the Giuliani package as 9/11, banished squeegee men and shuttered porn parlors.

After reviewing the NRA call and his comment in London about how he was one of the most famous people in America, Haberman gives some other examples.

More...

The Washington Post explores Rudy Giuliani's claim he is the go-to guy in the war on terror. Here's a snippet, to give you the flavor:

But for most of Giuliani's career as a Department of Justice official, prosecutor and New York's chief executive, terrorism was a narrow aspect of his broader crime-fighting agenda, which was dominated by drug dealers, white-collar criminals and the Mafia. Giuliani expressed confidence that Islamic extremism could be contained through vigorous investigation by law enforcement agencies and prosecution in the court system -- the same approach he now condemns.

The LA Times recounts his flip-flopping on immigration.

More...

Newsweek reports Howard Dean is courting Republican evangelicals.

One of those he's met with recently is a Tennessee evangelical named Richard Iband. Can this be true?

"Dean told me how the Democrats were pro-life in that they wanted a country in which abortion was rare. I said, 'I agree, but we disagree how to get there.' Still, it was certainly a change in tone."

Apparently, yes. Dean told Newseek:

"In the past, we've come off as dismissive to evangelicals," Dean tells NEWSWEEK. "But our party has become much more comfortable talking about faith and values.

"Are we going to abandon Roe v. Wade? No. But a lot can be done to prevent teen pregnancy and abortions. There is a lot we do agree on."

If you're not queasy enough yet, keep reading.