Riding tonight's Diary Rescue streetcar are ItsJessMe, Purple Priestess, HoosierDeb, grog, shayera, and pico, with YatPundit at the controls.

Diary Rescue is all about recognizing quality writing that's off the beaten path of the rec list. Be sure to read, tip, and comment!

• Must-read for anyone interested in climate change: matching mole provides a clear, succinct summary of ecosystem ecology in An Ecosystem View of Climate Change. (pico)
• citisven shares a truly inspirational story in Bikes in Istanbul? (shayera)
• After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers approved a permit for Arch Coal's Pine Creek No. 1 Surface Mine in southern West Virginia, rperks sighs There Goes Another Mountain. (ItsJessMe)
• From the road, Crashing Vor describes pretty much every military town in Soldier Town. (Purple Priestess)
• Miep envisions an outside the box version of 'community' in Thoughts on Corners. (HoosierDeb)
• 8ackgr0und N015e points out how it's not in anybody's best interest to trust the FBI to do the right thing in The future we feared has officially arrived. (grog)
• norwood, inspired by the late great George Carlin, explains why unions are so important in Unions 101 - We Are All Working Class. (Purple Priestess)
• MsSpentyouth relates this chilling story about what happens when tea party candidates take over a school board in African-American school board member manhandled by police. (grog)
• jpmassar brings us ENDA: The Straight Dope. (shayera)
• skralyx fills us in on a recent scientific breakthrough, in Creeptastic: Bacteria that make spider webs! (ItsJessMe)
• Vorkosigan points out a developing scenario which will carry global consequences as the The US wades into the South China Sea: A Rising Hegemon Floats All Boats. (HoosierDeb)
• In Anatomy of a Meltdown, Shef charts the increasingly bizarre claims by JournoList-obsessed conservatives. (pico)

jotter has High Impact Diaries.

Ed Tracey brings us Top Comments: Rowan & Martin's "Laugh-In" edition.

Please join the Rescue Ranger krewe this evening by suggesting our own picks in this Open Thread.

Fitting, it would seem, that the last edition of the Polling and Political Wrap (for two weeks, anyway) would also provide a new track record in terms of number of stories and length. Geez, I almost had to cancel my first set of hotel reservations for the family road-trip just to write the danged thing.

Yes, fellow horserace junkies, your humble curator of the Wrap will be taking leave for a couple of weeks to explore the beauty of America from behind the wheel of the family truckster. Think Clark Griswold with facial hair and about forty or fifty additional pounds.

In the meantime, there is no shortage of electoral goodness on the FP, with or without the Wrap. So stick around, and you will see the next edition of the Wrap on Saturday, August 14th. Consider it a really, really short hiatus.

And with that, a heaping helping of horserace nuggets await us in this Thursday "getting my ass out of town" edition of the Wrap....

THE U.S. SENATE

CA-Sen: PPIC says Boxer up five over Fiorina, one third undecided
In a poll where one has to doubt that leaners were pushed very hard, the well-known local pollsters at PPIC find that incumbent Senator Barbara Boxer leads businesswoman Carly Fiorina by five points (39-34) in her re-election bid. The state's climate seems to favor Boxer: President Obama maintains a 56% approval rating in the state, and even among California Independent voters Boxer maintains a six-point advantage.

CO-Sen: Primary poll claims toss-up on the Democratic side
Some have speculated (myself included) that the Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate between appointed incumbent Michael Bennet and challenger Andrew Romanoff might be a little closer than the conventional wisdom. There is now some supporting data for this speculation. A new poll out from Zata|3 (last seen polling the races in Arkansas for Talk Business) shows that Bennet has just a four-point lead over Romanoff (44-40). Most polling to this point has suggested a double-digit lead for Bennet. The primary is looming on August 10th, less than two weeks away.

CT-Sen: Newly returning Rob Simmons lands huge endorsement
In a sign that his campaign really is back (and, furthermore, a sign that the outlet in question really can't stand Linda McMahon), the Hartford Courant has trotted out their endorsement for the August 10th GOP Senate primary. They have decided to give the nod to former Congressman Rob Simmons, whose in-out-in-out-in routine has been a true sight to behold. Simmons is once again challenging well-heeled frontrunner Linda McMahon for the party nomination, after suspending his campaign after she earned the party's endorsement during the state conventions in May.

OR-Sen: Wyden looks reasonably secure in new SUSA poll
In addition to new Rasmussen data which puts three-term Democratic incumbent Ron Wyden in a stronger position, new numbers out today from SurveyUSA also show a comfortable (albeit not dominant) lead for the Senator. Wyden leads law professor Jim Huffman by eighteen points (53-35) in the new SUSA poll. Propelling Wyden to victory is a better than two-to-one edge among moderates (61-26), which make up more than 40% of the voters in the state.

THE U.S. HOUSE

AZ-03: McCain endorses is super-crowded GOP primary field
After taking several months, presumably to learn all the names in the double-digit field of candidates vying to replace retiring Rep. John Shadegg, Senator John McCain has offered his support to state Senator Jim Waring. The endorsement was undoubtedly awkward, as there were a handful of Republicans (including VP progeny Ben Quayle) that had already offered their endorsement of McCain in his contested Senate primary with J.D. Hayworth. The endorsement comes less than a month before the raft of GOP contenders go head-to-head on the ballot on August 24th. In the meantime, Democrat Jon Hulburd is conserving resources for what could prove to be a surprisingly competitive Democratic primary.

FL-08: GOPer wields internal poll with 8-point edge in November
It would appear that one way to try to get traction in a crowded primary field is to demonstrate viability in the general election. That appears to be the game plan for repeat candidate Todd Long, who has released an internal poll from John Zogby claiming an 8-point general election lead over Democratic freshman incumbent Alan Grayson (46-38). Long, of course, first must navigate a multicandidate GOP primary on August 24th, a primary where he is unlikely to be the frontrunner. That honor would likely go to either former state House Speaker Dan Webster or free-spending businessman Bruce O'Donoghue.

KS-04: Looks like Pompeo vs. Goyle in Tiahrt open seat
With primary day just a handful of days away, the field in the Wichita-based open seat being abandoned by the Senate-aspiring Todd Tiahrt looks to be shaking out a little bit. This is especially true on the Democratic side, where running some early ads seems to have paid off for DCCC recruit Raj Goyle. Once slightly trailing little-known retiree Robert Tillman, he now holds a commanding 63-19 lead. On the Democratic side, businessman Wink Hartman went from co-frontrunner to third place. Businessman Mike Pompeo now holds a clear lead with 31% of the vote, though moderate state legislator Jean Schodorf has launched out of the teens into second place at 24%. Hartman is third at 21% of the vote.

KY-06: Public poll gives Chandler a double-digit lead over Barr
This is a good enough result to even seem a bit too optimistic, but new numbers from Braun Research (on behalf of local political website CN|2) gives Democratic incumbent Ben Chandler a fourteen-point edge (46-32) over Republican challenger Andy Barr. Voters split 48-43 in favor of Chandler's vote on health care reform, which might be a bit lofty in a district carried by John McCain in 2008.

NC-07: Frasier star raises cash for longshot GOPer
I think DavidNYC over at SSP said it all when he preceded this story with the single-word introduction of "Barf." Longshot Republican challenger Ilario Pantano, perhaps best known for avoiding prosecution for the premeditated murder of two Iraqis in April of 2004, is getting a high-profile name raising cash for him--Kelsey Grammer. The former television star will be heading to North Carolina to appear at two house-party fundraisers for Pantano.

NH-01/NH-02: Dems betting .500 in competitive Granite State races
As the old saw goes, we have good news and bad news out of New Hampshire, where the University of New Hampshire (PDF) updates their semi-regular polling of the state's two House districts. The good news? Two-term incumbent Carol Shea-Porter has pulled into a lead over all of her GOP challengers. Former Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta comes the closest, trailing by five points (44-39). The other Republican candidates fall somewhere between 8-11 points behind Shea-Porter, who has positive favorability for the first time in quite a while. Meanwhile, Republican Charlie Bass is still riding his name recognition edge to a lead over either Democratic suitor. Despite being far better known, Katrina Swett (30-47) performs almost identically to lesser-known (but Orange to Blue endorsed) progressive candidate Ann McLane Kuster (29-47).

NY-13: McMahon hits GOP contender for "Jewish Money"
This is pretty low-budget, and it doesn't particularly matter to me that it was a Democrat doing it to a Republican. The campaign of freshman Democrat Mike McMahon wanted to make the point that little of the money being raised by GOP contender Michael Grimm was emanating from the 13th district. Which would be fine, except that the file that McMahon's campaign sent over to a local political website was titled "Grimm Jewish Money Q2." If you want to make a point of a candidate raising cash outside of the district, have at it. But..."Jewish" money?!?! UPDATE: Gee, that didn't long. Politico is reporting that McMahon has fired the staffer responsible for sending that file.

OR-05: GOP contender--extending unemployment is "European"
Add the voice of "moderate" Republican state legislator (and Congressional nominee) Scott Bruun to the growing chorus of Republicans who feel like extending relief to unemployed Americans is...well...un-American. Bruun, who is challenging freshman Democrat Kurt Schrader in a potentially competitive race, said of the UI benefits extension:

"When we're talking up over close to two years and longer with jobless benefits, I think we really start talking about a European style system and all the problems that that sort of system brings if you try to bring that sort of system to the United States."

Bruun is the latest inductee into what Plum Line writer Greg Sargent has dubbed the "Let Them Eat Want Ads caucus."

PA-06: Gerlach has a history of optimistic internals
In yesterday's Wrap, I noted that Republican incumbent Jim Gerlach seemed pretty confident about his prospects in November, even revealing an internal poll showing him with a massive lead over Democrat Manan Trivedi. The guys over at Swing State Project did a little digging, however, and discovered that Gerlach has a little bit of a habit of releasing overly rosy internal polling. In September of 2008, for example, he released an internal showing him wiping the floor with Bob Roggio (57-28). Gerlach wound up winning by four points.

THE GUBERNATORIAL RACES

CA-Gov: PPIC confirms PPP--Whitman trails despite eight-figure bid
Over a hundred million dollars into the kitty, and Meg Whitman still can't buy a lead over Democratic nominee Jerry Brown. That was the conclusion of the PPP poll released earlier this week, and it has now been confirmed by new numbers from PPIC. The local pollsters gives Brown a three-point edge over Whitman (37-34), which is similar to PPP's six-point edge for the Democrat earlier in the week. Despite Whitman's feeble attempts to walk back her immigration stances in the primary, PPIC sees Latino voters seeing through it. That subset of voters prefers Brown by a 42-18 margin.

In more amusing gubernatorial news, it looks like buyers' remorse comes seven years too late for the Democrats in California. PPP asked voters whether they would prefer to have the ousted Gray Davis as Governor, or the current occupant (Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger). Davis wins on that score by a 44-38 margin.

FL-Gov: Scott maintains double-digit edge in GOP Gov's primary
Markos noted earlier the double-digit edge for gazillionaire Jeff Greene over Kendrick Meek in the Democratic Senate primary in the Sunshine State. It turns out that Florida apparently likes their billionaires, as the same Quinnipiac poll showed Republican Rick Scott holding onto an eleven-point lead (43-32) over state Attorney General Bill McCollum. That is actually a slight narrowing of the margins for McCollum, who was down thirteen in the immediate wake of Scott's deluge of campaign ads to kick off his campaign.

KY-Gov (2011): Teabagger GOP businessman announces against Beshear
Earlier in the week, the Wrap noted that former Rand Paul campaign head David Adams was teasing that he had found a candidate for Kentucky Governor that would unite the GOP establishment and the teabaggers. Remember, of course, that Adams was said to have abandoned the Paul campaign to find such a statewide candidate. Apparently, he has that candidate--Phil Moffett. Moffett, who owns an IT firm, will join a field likely to include Ag Commissioner Richie Farmer and state legislator David Williams.

MD-Gov: Ehrlich GOP primary challenger going on the air?
This would make for a much more interesting primary on September 14th: Brian Murphy, the businessman waging a longshot campaign against GOP establishment favorite (and former Governor) Robert Ehrlich, is soliciting funds in advance of taking his campaign onto the air in Maryland. Democratic Governor Martin O'Malley had already been on the air for a couple of weeks, while Ehrlich was conserving resources. An active primary challenger, of course, would force Ehrlich's hand, in all likelihood.

NH-Gov: Lynch has double-digit lead over entire GOP field, says PPP
Democratic incumbent Governor John Lynch might not be able to count on the 40-to-50 point wins he grew accustomed to in 2006 and 2008, but he is still on his way to a comfortable victory. Lynch holds leads over the entire field of Republicans angling for the gubernatorial nod. Former state commissioner John Stephen comes the closest, but still trails Lynch by a seventeen-point margin (51-34). Lynch also leads the trio of lesser-known Republicans eyeing the nomination: Frank Emiro (48-28), Jack Kimball (52-29), and Karen Testerman (52-28).

NY-Gov: Paladino nixes third-party bid for Governor
Democratic Andrew Cuomo has benefited in this cycle from a huge financial edge and a sizeable polling lead over his GOP rivals. He will not, however, benefit from divided opposition in November. Such is the word of Buffalo-area businessman Carl Paladino, who has now made it clear that it is GOP nomination or bust. Paladino is challenging former Congressman Rick Lazio for that nomination.

OR-Gov: Yet another pollster confirms gubernatorial tossup
Another day, another poll out of Oregon, another data point confirming that former Democratic Governor John Kitzhaber is getting all that he can handle from former NBA baller Chris Dudley. The latest piece of evidence is the SurveyUSA poll showing Dudley leading Kitzhaber by a 46-44 margin. Worth noting--the key ingredient here is how well Dudley is performing in the Portland metro area, home to 2/3 of the state's voters. Kitzhaber only leads in this traditionally Democratic area by two percentage points. At this point, nearly one-in-five Democrats are crossing over to vote for Dudley.

UT-Gov: Has Corroon found the issue to propel him to competitiveness?
Peter Corroon, the Democratic nominee for Governor in Utah, bears the burden of both the climate of the cycle and the deep-red terrain of his state. But he seems to be test-driving an issue that he thinks he can hang around the neck of the incumbent: nuclear waste. Corroon is hammering Republican Governor Gary Herbert for dawdling in the wake of a judge's ruling which could open the door to a nuclear waste facility on reservation land in Utah County. Herbert's office says it is studying the judge's decision.

THE RAS-A-POLL-OOZA

Even before Brian Sandoval crapped the bed on the issues of immigration and SB1070, Rasmussen already had his lead dissipating. In all other races, though, Rasmussen stays very true to form. No matter what the race, you will find Republicans doing well.

IL-Gov: Bill Brady (R) 44%, Gov. Pat Quinn (D) 37%
MO-Sen: Roy Blunt (R) 49%, Robin Carnahan (D) 43%
NV-Gov: Brian Sandoval (R) 50%, Rory Reid (D) 40%
OK-Gov: Mary Fallin (R) 57%, Jari Askins (D) 36%
WI-Sen: Ron Johnson (R) 48%, Sen. Russ Feingold (D) 46%

First, Republicans and their Democratic anti-choice accomplices got an Executive Order from the president, guaranteeing that, although already prohibited, the government really will not use taxpayer dollars to fund abortion.

But that wasn't enough.

So the Obama administration issued further restrictions on high-risk insurance pools, to assure Republicans yet again that the government really, really will not use taxpayer dollars to fund abortion.

But that wasn't enough.

Because now Republicans are again demanding that the Obama administration "act immediately" to ensure that the government really, really, really will not use taxpayer dollars to fund abortion.

None of this is necessary. It wasn't necessary when Bart Stupak held health care reform hostage last year. It isn't necessary now. The atrocious Hyde Amendment, which has been renewed every year for 30 years, already prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortion. But because the forced birth movement is never satisfied and will always seek further restrictions, and because Republicans love to make shit up, especially when it comes to what the health care law will and will not do, they continue to demand that the president cross his heart, hope to die, stick a needle in his eye that the government really, really, really, really will not use taxpayer dollars to fund abortion.

Just like the birthers who demand proof of the president's citizenship when they have already been given proof again and again and again, Republicans obviously will not be satisfied with executive orders and policy clarifications and additional restrictions that go beyond Hyde. They'll keep whining anyway, even while all of their demands are met.

So women who are already at risk -- that's why they're in the high-risk pools in the first place -- will continue to face increasing restrictions on access to what is supposed to be a legal medical procedure. And just as the Hyde Amendment kills women, so too will these restrictions.

But when it comes to Republicans and the forced birth movement, saving women's lives apparently has nothing to do with protecting life.

This should surprise exactly no one:

Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly took aim at "unmarried women" at a recent fundraiser and in an interview with TPM, saying that they overwhelmingly support President Obama and are all on welfare. Democrats aim to exploit the comments to pressure the more than 60 Republican candidates who have earned Schlafly's endorsement.

"Unmarried women, 70% of unmarried women, voted for Obama, and this is because when you kick your husband out, you've got to have big brother government to be your provider," said Schlafly, president of Eagle Forum and infamous for her opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment.

Phyllis Schlafly bashing women is nothing new. After all, the woman made a career out of saying women shouldn't have careers. Or equal rights.

But now that Republicans have decided to embrace feminism, you'd think they'd be quick to denounce Schlafly for her anti-woman remarks. Which is exactly what Democrats are asking them to do:

Democrats plan to jump on the 75 Republican candidates for federal office that Schlafly's Eagle Forum has endorsed and donated to -- a list that includes Todd Tiahrt in the Kansas Republican primary for Senate, Ken Buck in the Colorado Republican primary for Senate, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and his Senate Conservatives Fund and Sen. David Vitter...

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is doing the same thing to Eagle Forum-endorsed House candidates, painting Republicans on dozens of ballots -- including Rep. Michele Bachmann and Scott Rigell in the competitive VA-02 race -- as "extreme" and saying the candidate should refuse Schlafly's endorsement.

But so far, the only condemnation came from congressional candidate Andrew (Rocky) Raczkowski, at whose fundraiser Schlafly was speaking when she made the remarks.

Raczkowski said he was taken aback by the comments, but noted that they didn't reflect his beliefs.

"I will fight vehemently for her to have her beliefs. That's what makes this country so great," he said. "I believe in equality for everyone. I'm color-blind and gender blind."

Here's a perfect opportunity for the conservative "feminists," including Sharron Angle and Michele Bachmann, both endorsed by the Eagle Forum, to prove their pro-woman street cred. After all, if they're going to take up the mantle of the feminist movement, they're going to need the support of unmarried women, aren't they?  

And certainly, any minute now, the winking, lipsticked Queen of Mama Grizzly Pit Bulls, Ms. I-Can-Be-A-Feminist-Also-Too-Also Sarah Palin, should be Twittering and Facebooking her refudiation of such obviously anti-woman remarks.

Any minute now...

Two of the emails I got today:

You know the honeymoon is over when the comedians start.

The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . . and think 25 to life would be appropriate.
--Jay Leno

America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.
--Jay Leno

Q: Have you heard about McDonald's' new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
--Conan O'Brien

Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.
--Jay Leno

Q: What's the difference between Obama's cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers, and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.
--David Letterman

Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
A: America!
--Jimmy Fallon

Q: What's the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.
--Jimmy Kimmel

Q: What was the most positive result of the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.
--David Letterman

All of this is false, of course. None of the comedians on this list said any such things. That hasn't stopped this email from flying around the wingnutosphere. Googling around, I caught a Free Republic thread with respondents high-five'ing each other over this, convinced that the world has turned against Obama and Democrats.

Then there's this:

Hello, you communist shitbag!

I own a small company with 8 employees, 6 of them black. A friend of mine (who is in a position to know these things) says that the Obama administration is quietly planning a scheme which would classify businesses such as mine as "minority controlled" and turn them over to the minority employees. I would of course receive "compensation" but I would lose my company. Is this your idea of "social justice"? Are you trying to get me to fire my black employees so that they would again be at the mercy of government bureaucrats and government handouts? Is this your way of bringing socialsm to America? Or is this your version of reparations for slavery? I think that you and the rest of Obama's errand boys are nothing but brownshirts. If you want to steal American private property I can guarantee that you will all be impeached and tried for treason! It's starting to look like Obama's race talk was only a ruse to allow him to socialize the economy (starting with health care), and the republicans are letting him get away with it. We need to send real patriots to the next Congress,people who are not afraid to stop Obamas socialist agenda in it's tracks.

Of course, no such thing is ever going to happen, but that doesn't stop this crowd from literally making shit up, whipping themselves into a frenzy over the coming armageddon, whether it's over guns, death panels, or minority workplace uprisings.

How can we have a debate with a political movement that has zero allegiance to the truth? The likes of Breitbart rule their world, reality is ignored because it has a well-known liberal bias, and there is no lie that can't be justified in pursuit of ideological victory. They throw so much bullshit against the wall, that it is impossible for anyone else to sort out the facts and correct the record.

Whoever wrote the first draft of that first email above knew it was bullshit, but didn't care. That first "joke", for example, is an old recycled anti-Clinton joke. The "friend" who told the second emailer about the impending takeover of his company (assuming he's not full of shit about that) also knows he's full of shit. Breitbart has openly admitted that he cares nothing about the truth, just about pushing his narratives into the traditional media. Let's not even get into Fox News or Limbaugh.

Their's is a movement built on a foundation of lies, and they don't care. The end always justifies their means.

And it's arguably even worse than the Senate version, gutting commercial space and preserving remnants of a program that will never fly. Background: there was a fight between proponents and critics of Constellation, the centerpiece of Bush's space policy. But the funding never materialized, no surprise since it could have topped $50 billion, and a panel of experts recommended not wasting resources on it unless the funding levels were greatly increased. That fight is over, Constellation isn't going to be funded. The fight now is between preserving a handful of jobs at NASA related to Constellation even though it will never fly, or using that money for other projects.

Obviously jobs are important, but only a few lucky NASA jobs would be preserved by token funding of parts of the defunct program -- naturally favored by giant aerospace contractors -- and everyone else is SOL. Even then it would come at the price of other, viable projects that might actually further space exploration and which also represent jobs. Guess which path the House bill takes?

The bill (H.R. 5781), approved by the House Science and Technology Committee July 22, fully funds NASA’s $19 billion request for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, but guts a White House proposal to spend $5.9 billion over the next five years fostering development of commercial vehicles to ferry astronauts to and from Earth orbit. Although the measure includes $150 million for privately developed space taxis through 2013 and another $300 million in the form of government-backed loans or loan guarantees, it would also continue much of the work being done under NASA’s Constellation program ...

If Congress continues in this manner it virtually guarantees the US won't have a manned rocket to replace the shuttle for years to come, if ever. And in the event one is developed before 2020 it will cost tens of billions when there are already commercial alternatives available at a fraction of that cost. Crazy.

Update: Take Action: To give Speaker Pelosi the backing she needs to fix NASA, please call her office (202.225.0100) tonight or tomorrow morning to say, "Please don't rush the NASA bill for a vote Friday, we need time for a real debate."  It is also effective to call Majority Leader Steny Hoyer's office at 202.225.3130. Every phone call counts before Friday afternoon.

Colbert mocks the deficit "hawks":

While the energy bill won't do much in the way of carbon regulation, the EPA still can. That is, if coal state Senators can be stopped.

Via David Dayen, earlier this week the White House vowed to veto legislation that would block the EPA from writing new climate change rules.

Coal-state Democrats, led by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (W. Va.), Reps. Rick Boucher (Va.) and Nick Rahall (W. Va), are trying to limit the federal government’s ability to control greenhouse gases from power plants.

The coal-state proposals, which would block the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority for two years, would undercut what is widely seen as Obama’s alternative climate policy, now that Congress has punted on cap-and-trade legislation for the year. The Obama aide said the proposals won’t win the president’s signature if they managed to pass on Capitol Hill. Rockefeller’s bill is expected to reach the Senate floor at some point this year.

Back in 2007, a Supreme Court ruling mandated that the EPA regulate greenhouse gasses, and the administration is determined to follow that law.

And Jay Rockefeller is determined to try to stop it, possibly by attempting to amend the energy bill on the floor next week. One way to circumvent him, without forcing a veto of the entire bill, would be for Reid to refuse amendments to the bill, something he has indicated might happen.

Which would hamper efforts to strengthen the bill in other ways. One of the most popular proposals in committee was the Renewable Electricity Standard, which would mandate that utilities get a certain percentage of their power from renewables. There's an effort afoot now to get this amendment allowed on the floor.

Meanwhile, Republicans have introduced an alternative bill, that would basically let BP off the hook by not applying a liability cap in it retroactively to apply to the Gulf spill.

Quinnipiac. 7/22-27. Likely primary voters. MoE 3.5% (June 10 results)

One of the knocks against Meek is that he's never run a tough race in his life. He inherited his safe Democratic House district from his mother, and his inexperience gaining traction in a less hospitable environment isn't just about the general election anymore, but in a primary against a joke candidate.

Remember, Greene is the billionaire who made his fortune betting against the subprime market, who parties with Lindsay Lohan, has Heidi Fleiss as his roommate, and boasted Mike Tyson as his best man at his wedding. Quite the character references. Greene also ran for Congress as a Republican in the past. Meek already begged off when reporters asked whether he'd endorse Greene if he were to win the nomination. And he was right to do so -- Greene is not a serious candidate, and certainly not worthy of having a "D" next to his name.

There are two camps rooting for a Greene primary victory -- Greene (and his money-grubbing consultants), and Charlie Crist.

Having Meek as the nominee conflicts Democrats -- Crist is the more electorally viable and is likely to caucus with the Democrats, but you don't want to abandon the One True Democrat in the race. But if the amoral Greene buys the nomination (and he's spending millions of his own money to do so), then the choice is easy. The Democratic establishment, donors, and even some of its activists can rally around Crist and dump Greene by the side of the road, where he belongs.

Wow.

By Adriana Arévalo, News Director, Univision Nevada

Special to El Tiempo

All of a sudden, it seems Brian Sandoval is Hispanic. How curious! The saying that you never know where life will take you is definitely true. In fact, on his life journey, Sandoval must have taken a fall, lost his memory and woken up believing what his campaign advisors are telling him -- “you’re Hispanic.” [...]

As for Sandoval, many people were left with their mouths wide open (including this columnist) with the candidate’s commercial recently launched on Hispanic television, which literally says, “With your help, Brian Sandoval can become the first Hispanic Governor in the history of Nevada.” It took a few minutes for me to recover after hearing that for the first time. I couldn’t believe it. Not even Bush, in his best moments of stuttering and muddled thinking, had shocked me as much. I thought it was one of his opponent’s commercials, or maybe it was meant to be ironic. But no, it wasn’t part of the Democratic strategy, or a parody; it seemed like a bad joke, but it was real [...]

Before he launched such an affirmation on television, his campaign must have psychologically prepared him so he wouldn’t suffer some sort of trauma upon seeing himself identified as Hispanic. It wasn’t long ago that he said in an interview on Univision that he vehemently supported Arizona’s anti-immigrant law. In reference to the same law, he was asked how he would feel if he his children were stopped in the street and asked for their papers. He answered, with a note of pride in his voice, “my children don’t look Hispanic.”

Nevada journalist Jon Ralston asked Sandoval about it during his TV show, but Sandoval twice denied making the comments. So Ralstonfollowed up with Univision:

I have confirmed that Brian Sandoval, as reported by Univision’s news director in a column and revealed in an earlier blog post, did indeed say that his children don’t look Hispanic when asked by the Spanish-language station whether he was worried about his kids being profiled if they were in Arizona.

Sandoval denied (twice) making the comments during an interview with “Face to Face” this week. But the comments are on videotape, I have confirmed. Univision, however, is declining to release the tape, claiming (as most media organizations would) that it is work product.

This doesn't look good for Sandoval's Latino outreach efforts (a huge constituency in Nevada), nor is it a welcome story in a race where the Republican is winning handily against Reid Jr.

But perhaps most telling to me, this is a tacit admission by a Republican of what the Arizona law is really all about. His kids don't look Latino, so they have nothing to fear from SB 1070.

What's the flipside of that statement?

As Yglesias says, "The End of Probable Cause." WaPo reports:

The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order if agents deem the information relevant to a terrorism or intelligence investigation.

The administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly a user's browser history. It does not include, the lawyers hasten to point out, the "content" of e-mail or other Internet communication.

This power would be conferred upon the same FBI whose agents have "cheated on tests on how to legally conduct domestic surveillance cases." Maybe this is just the administration's way of making sure these people won't have to cheat on future tests--not they won't have to worry about the pesky details of conducting domestic surveillance legally, since they won't have to worry about warrants.

Matt raises the question of "misused work resources . . . for personal purposes." The larger concern, and anybody who lived through Nixon and is old enough to remember it will share it, is the very real potential for the systematic misuse of information for political purposes. It's happened before and will happen again, and our government should at least have to go through the niceties of taking actual legal steps in order to spy on us. As Matt also points out, it's not that hard. All it takes is "some kind of cause—probable cause, let’s say—to suspect someone of involvement in terrorism, [is to] just get a warrant."

Probable cause and warrants. The stuff of democracy. The stuff, in fact, of the Constitution, the fourth amendment to be precise.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Democracy, American-style:

Several major coal companies hope to use newly loosened campaign-finance laws to pool their money and defeat Democratic congressional candidates they consider “anti-coal,” including U.S. Senate nominee Jack Conway and U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler in Kentucky.

The companies hope to create a politically active nonprofit under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, so they won’t have to publicly disclose their activities — such as advertising — until they file a tax return next year, long after the Nov. 2 election.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last winter that corporations and labor unions may pour unlimited funds into such efforts to influence elections.

“With the recent Supreme Court ruling, we are in a position to be able to take corporate positions that were not previously available in allowing our voices to be heard,” wrote Roger Nicholson, senior vice president and general counsel at International Coal Group of Scott Depot, W.Va., in an undated letter he sent to other coal companies [...]

In his letter, Nicholson said his company and three others — Massey Energy, Alliance Resource Partners and Natural Resource Partners — “have already had some theoretical discussions about such an effort and would like to proceed in developing an action plan.”

Several of those companies have been involved in recent mine disasters that led to congressional scrutiny of their safety problems. International Coal Group owned the Sago mine in West Virginia where 12 miners died in 2006. Massey owned the Upper Big Branch mine, also in West Virginia, where 29 miners died in April. Two miners died in April in a Western Kentucky mine owned by an Alliance Resource subsidiary.

“Between them, ICG and Massey have had 41 miners killed in just two disasters,” Oppegard said. “It’s disturbing to see companies that don’t have strong safety records try to defeat politicians, like Ben Chandler, who have fought for stronger mine safety.”

This is the tip of the iceberg, and exactly what conservatives and their allies on the Supreme Court hoped for when they gutted campaign finance law.

Contribute to Jack Conway
Jack Conway for Senate

• FL-Sen: The GOP hopes Florida voters have short memories.

  NRSC Chairman John Cornyn told my colleague Manu Raju today that Florida Gov. Charile Crist's Senate mo will slow now that BP has finally plugged the leak in the gulf, but acknowleded that the independent candidate has enjoyed a boost from his on-the-scene role.

  “I think now that Gov. Crist is no longer going to get as much free TV time because the well has been capped and, hopefully, the beaches are being cleaned up, that I think you’ll see Marco [Rubio] continue to grow his numbers," Cornyn said, alluding to the considerable local, state and national coverage that Crist has gotten from many hours spent on the Florida beaches in recent months.

• Newt Gingrich has a new sci-fi novel out.

  [T]he secular socialists believe the only reliable institution is a bureaucratic, centralized, supremely powerful government. Their answer to virtually every problem is higher taxes, more spending, and bigger bureaucracies, because they don’t believe Americans can be trusted to make the “right” decisions ….

  Powerful politicians will impose their will on an exhausted, submissive citizenry, who will look to government bureaucrats for guidance and permission to succeed in life. Naturally, there will be no place for God in this new, purely secular society.

  …. The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.

  Wonkette:

  Ah, that sounds bad. As you might guess, these secular-socialist machines were sent from the future by intergalactic space tyranny A-CORN. Their orders: Locate the spirit of our nation’s founder, Ronald Reagan, and kill it. Or at least trap it in one of those boxes from Ghostbusters, because the S-S machines need to avoid a Tea Party insurrection in the future. Understandable, really, because nobody wants to spend the future getting yelled at by a swelling population of rancorous old people.

  Thank heavens Newt is on the case!

• I'm old enough to remember when Lindsay Graham was considered a "moderate" who "bucked his party".
• Bullshit myths about social security:

  Top 5 Social Security Myths

  Rumors of Social Security's demise are greatly exaggerated. But some powerful people keep spreading lies about the program to scare people into accepting benefit cuts. Can you check out this list of Social Security myths and share it with your friends, family and coworkers?

  Myth: Social Security is going broke.

  Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.1 After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits--and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers retirement decades ago. Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

  Myth: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.

  Reality: This is red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than did 70 years ago.3 What's more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly--since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half.4 But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut.

  Myth: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security.

  Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come. Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income. But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

  Myth: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs

  Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't full of IOUs, it's full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market--which would have been disastrous--but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.

  Myth: Social Security adds to the deficit

  Reality: It's not just wrong -- it's impossible! By law, Social Security funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.

• Rush Limbaugh says the gulf oil spill was no big deal? Let's see him eat some Gulf-caught shrimp and fish. Haley Barbour too. The lot of them.

  You think it was no big deal? Prove it by feasting on Gulf Coast seafood.

• Senate GOP votes against tax cuts for small businesses, because they want nothing more than to obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. Nothing else matters.
• An example of why new media rules: an otherwise tedious story about yet another governor's amazing luck in the very same real estate market he happens to regulate, but set in snarky format right down the jaunty tune. -- DS

Remember BMW Direct aka Base Connect?

BMW Direct, the GOP fundraising firm known for taking long-shot candidates for a ride while raking in big bucks off their campaigns, has re-emerged under a new name -- but with a similar modus operandi. And this time around, even some Republicans are crying foul, with one consultant accusing the firm of engaging in "sub-prime fundraising."

One 2010 client of BMW Direct -- now rechristened as Base Connect -- is William Russell, the retired lieutenant colonel who is running for the Pennsylvania Congressional seat of the late John Murtha. Russell's campaign raised over $895,000 in the fourth quarter of last year, according to federal disclosure records. But it paid over $719,000 of that amount -- about 80 percent -- to Base Connect, and other companies associated with it, which ran the company's direct-mail fundraising program. For the year as a whole, Russell's campaign raised over $2.8 million, but spent over $2.6 million -- much of it again going to Base Connect -- leaving it with cash on hand of just $211,000.

The funny thing about Base Connect is that it generally represented long-shot candidates. No one credible or top-tier would be stupid enough to use them.

But Sharron Angle is stupid enough to use them.

Sharron Angle, who has fallen behind Harry Reid in several recent polls and can scarcely afford to squander any resources, has sunk $637,000 into a notorious D.C. direct mail firm. A Salon review of the Nevada Republican's FEC filings found that Angle has forked over about 20 percent of all the money she's raised to Base Connect, which is known for charging its conservative clients exorbitant fees -- as high as 80% -- and was recently dropped by a sitting Republcian congressman because of its terrible reputation [...]

GOP consultant Bill Pascoe dubbed this "subprime fundraising." And Erick Erickson once said that candidates who use the firm are in danger of losing RedState's endorsement, presumably because conservative donors' money is going to a fundraising agency rather than actually helping the cause. Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA) dropped all ties with Base Connect after Talking Points Memo reported in March he was paying the firm 75 percent in fundraising fees.

Harry Reid is seriously the luckiest son of a bitch in politics. Sharron Angle isn't just crazy on the issues and clueless on what's happening in the world, but completely incompetent in running a professional campaign. Just imagine what she'd do as Senator, and when the people of Nevada do, they suddenly decide that Reid isn't half as bad.

With Rasmussen:

Without Rasmussen:

From the non-profit part of Kaiser, which runs a well-respected health poll, via the Hill:

Americans view Democrats’ signature health reform bill more positively now than at any point since it was signed into law, a new poll found Thursday.

50 percent of the public say they view the new healthcare law favorably, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll that has been tracking public opinion about the legislation since it became law.

35 percent of adults said they view the law unfavorably, while 14 percent had no opinion.

The July numbers mark the strongest support for reform since it reached a low in May, when the Kaiser poll found the public opposed the law 44-41 percent.

Independents, for example, are fav/unfav 29/26, similar to the overall 29/25. And note the numbers for repeal (only 27% want that, even though it's the GOP's position.

On seniors:

The poll also took a closer look at the views of seniors since they are often assumed to have a uniform view about issues.  Below are some of the poll’s key findings about seniors’ views:


While seniors’ views of the new law are more negative than those of their younger counterparts, they remain roughly split about the law with 46 percent of seniors holding an unfavorable view of the law and 38 percent holding a favorable one. While 35 percent of seniors think they will be worse off under reform, a greater share (57%) say they will be better off (20%) or it will make no difference (37%).

Seniors’ awareness about the specific provisions of the health reform law that affect Medicare is mixed.  For example, about half are aware that the new law will result in premium increases for some higher income Medicare beneficiaries (52%) and gradually close Medicare’s “doughnut hole” (50%).  However, just a third (33% ) know the law will eliminate Medicare’s co-pays and deductibles for some preventive services.


And the WaPo's Behind the Numbers also slices and dices senior attitudes:

Seniors have long been more negative than younger adults toward the changes, and the new poll takes a deeper look at the reasons behind their opposition to the bill. A majority (52 percent) of seniors describe themselves as "disappointed" about the bill; 45 percent say they are "confused" by it and 42 percent are "anxious."

The poll suggests that older Americans' negative feelings about the bill may rest on perceptions that it will make it more difficult and expensive for those on Medicare to access health care. More than three-quarters of those age 65 and over who hold negative views of the new law say it will weaken the Medicare system and its financial backing, make it harder for those on Medicare to find a doctor who is willing to see them or to get needed health care, and increase out of pocket costs for seniors.

The toplines are here, the findings here.

Overall, you can see why Republicans fought this tooth and nail. Once it's passed, and people find out what is in it, they tend to like it. And repealing it is a fool's errand.

Politico reports that business groups are preparing ads for the November elections and some are targeting health reform. "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has already vowed to invest $75 million in the mid-term elections. And health insurers are also planning to play big in November, although the specifics remain in flux. ... Both America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) and its Coalition for Medicare Choices are expected to play a major role in the messaging, along with individual companies. But neither group, according to sources, plans to directly attack Democrats, which would risk infuriating the White House as it writes reform regulations as well as the Blue Dog Democrats who opposed the legislation." Likely ads include those targeted to seniors in the Medicare Advantage program "explaining it was health reform – not insurers – that is responsible for their higher bills and slashed benefits, one industry official said" (Cummings and Frates, 7/28).

Expect Republicans to try and scare seniors, but from the numbers, the public is nonetheless coming around to view health reform positively, and repeal is going nowhere.

Roy Blunt is birther-curious.

Roy Blunt says maybe the government "should have never have gotten in the health care business" with Medicare and Medicaid.

Roy Blunt used a parable to compare President Obama and other Democrats in Washington to monkeys.

Roy Blunt wants to repeal health care reform.

Roy Blunt is not conservative enough for his state's teabaggers. When they heard Michele Bachmann was coming to Missouri to campaign for Blunt, 28 Tea Party groups issued a statement:

When we received a notification that Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, a strong supporter of Tea Parties nationally, and the originator of a “Tea Party Caucus” in Washington last week, will be coming to Missouri on July 31st to make phone calls with Roy Blunt from the St. Louis GOP headquarters, and to be a featured speaker at a Blunt fundraiser that night, we were shocked. We believe she has been grossly misled if she understands him to be a Missouri Tea Party candidate.

Tea Party participants believe the spending in Washington has to STOP. Roy Blunt voted for TARP and Cash for Clunkers. For Michele Bachmann to come to Missouri and give the impression that all the Missouri Tea Parties support Roy Blunt is an abomination of everything we have been standing up for. “Most Tea Party supporters I know will be baffled by Michele Bachmann helping someone with a record like Roy Blunt before the primary vote,” said Jedidiah Smith, a Tea party leader in Franklin County, Missouri.

Talk about raising the "ok, that's conservative enough" bar.

From the geniuses at CNN:

Should there be a “gatekeeper” regulating internet bloggers? In the aftermath of the Shirley Sherrod incident, that’s what CNN promoted on July 23.

Anchors Kyra Phillips and John Roberts discussed the “mixed blessing of the internet,” and agreed that there should be a crackdown on anonymous bloggers who disparage others on the internet.

“There are so many great things that the internet does and has to offer, but at the same time, Kyra, as you know, there is this dark side,” Roberts said. “Imagine what would have happened if we hadn’t taken a look at what happened with Shirley Sherrod and plumbed the depths further and found out that what had been posted on the internet was not in fact reflective of what she said.”

But Phillips replied that the mainstream media “can’t always do that.”

“There’s going to have be a point in time where these people have to be held accountable,” Phillips said. “How about all these bloggers that blog anonymously? They say rotten things about people and they’re actually given credibility, which is crazy. They’re a bunch of cowards, they’re just people seeking attention.”

Kyra? John? Last time I checked, Andrew Breitbart wasn't anonymous. Nor is he a blogger. So blaming "anonymous bloggers" for Breitbart's antics makes about as much sense as blaming CNN for them.

Yglesias:

The issue here, however, is primarily Andrew Breitbart. To a secondary extent, it’s Fox News and conservative talk radio. And to a broader extent it’s a conservative movement that continues to celebrate Breitbart and Fox News despite their legacy of inaccuracy and race-baiting. Anonymous bloggers have nothing to do with anything.

Heck, even Mark Halperin has figured this out. And he's usually the last person in the media establishment to figure these things out.