I live in perpetual fear that Joe Lieberman will retire, thus depriving us the opportunity to help kick him to the curb. I want his exit from politics to be as humiliating as possible. Therefore, this is encouraging:

He still has a few months to decide, but at the moment U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman said he’s “probably” running for reelection in 2012.

“I haven’t decided fully, but I’d say I’m probably going to run again,” Lieberman, who won reelection in 2006 as an Independent after being defeated in the Democratic primary by now gubernatorial contender, Ned Lamont, said Monday.

He's already started raising money, which is wonderful.

Truth is, Lieberman is among the least popular senators in the country, with Democrats (approve 33- disapprove 57) and Independents (41-51) hating on him pretty badly. There aren't enough Republicans (51-42) in Connecticut to get him over the line, and in any case, the GOP isn't likely to give the race a pass as they did in 2006. Lieberman has no base of support. Running would be supremely stupid. And with Rep. Chris Murphy ramping up with an eye toward 2012, he's already got a top-tier challenger in the cards.

But Lieberman has perhaps the most gigantic ego in the Senate (and the Senate is nothing if not egos). There'd be no more glorious achievement for him than to win reelection in the face of sniveling critics like us. It would be epic, a crowning achievement in his career.

I'm banking on that ego. Because really, there would be no more glorious achievement for me than to help what will be a massive labor-netroots-grassroots coalition rid the Senate of its Emperor Palpatine wannabe.

What you missed on Sunday Kos ….

• In An effective government, brooklynbadboy looked closely at the internals on a recent study about what Americans want from their government and discovered—surprise! surprise!—that it's not size that matters. It's the ability to get things done.
• In President Obama is on the wrong side of history, Kaili Joy Gray urged the president to rethink his stand on gay marriage.
• In Supporting the troops, Joan McCarter examined the sorry plight of a country that asks for the ultimate sacrifice from its military members and then denies them promised services once they return home.
• In An unfortunate debate, Jed Lewison pointed out the distraction to the underlying issue of sustainability inherent in the "Did dispersants help the BP oil spill clean-up?" discussion.
• In The tax ratchet, Dante Atkins tore apart the absurdities of the conservative stance on tax cuts, revenue and what exactly pays for itself.
• In Deep Inside the Parents Television Council, Jake McIntyre channels the thinking that has brought the organization to condemn an entire television program the group has yet to see, all based on the use of "$#*!". No, we're not substituting the word here. They are condemning the substitution as too offensive for their eyes and ears.
• In Czar Reed, Laurence Lewis looked to the past and re-examined a time when a Speaker risked his career in order to get his chamber functional again.

Smarmy condescension fairly drips in this latest Sarah Palin video:

Over the weekend, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was in Homer, Alaska, to film her TLC documentary series Sarah Palin’s Alaska. Alaskan teacher Kathleen Gustafson decided to welcome Palin with a banner reading “WORST GOVERNOR EVER.” Upon seeing Gustafson’s handiwork, Palin walked over to talk with her. Gustafson told Palin that she was angry that the former governor quit to become a “celebrity.” Palin tried to defend herself, claiming that she’s working to “elect candidates who understand the Constitution,” but the teacher was unmoved, insisting that if Palin really wanted to help the people of the state, she would not have quit her post ...

At one point, Palin asked Gustafson what she did for a living. When Gustafson responded that she is a teacher, Palin visibly rolled her eyes.

Apparently we can add teachers to the list of people who aren't "real" Americans.

Fancy Farm has been at the center of Kentucky politics since the 1930s (it began in 1880), the site of an annual picnic at a local church that marks the real start of the state's campaign season.

Rand Paul attended this weekend, and as usually happens when he shows his face anywhere, he flopped. For starters, his supporters were unimpressed.

Instead of delivering the kind of biting jabs and comebacks that have made the Fancy Farm picnic famous for more than a century, Paul started his speech with a mundane discussion of U.S. tax policy.

“The U.S. tax code is so large and out of control, like the rest of Washington, I couldn’t carry it on stage,” Paul began, referring to a group near the back of the event holding giant red boxes that said “Tax Code” on the front. “The U.S. tax code is $16,000 pages long,” he added.

Paul continued by reciting a string of numbers that appeared to give the crowd little to scream about [...]

“It’s not just the tax code. The regulatory code is 79,000 pages long,” he said. “We’ve added 10,000 regulations in the last decade. To comply with these regulations costs us over a trillion dollars.”

“Boring! Boring! Boring!” a group in the audience chanted in unison.

Afraid to actually face voters, Paul fled the scene.

Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul slipped in and out of the event faster than Senator David Vitter can change his diaper. Hell these two guys are slicker than K-Y Gel when it comes to slipping in and out of events and avoiding their constituents and now that Rand is in bed with Mitch they may need some of that Gel.

And with Democrat Jack Conway rocking the joint, studly Republican macho men were left with getting the vapors and fainting spells over his use of ... "profanity"?

Wholesome Christian values.

In a long line of the good and faithful.

One Kentucky church picnic was blessed with someone special:

[Grainy video of Jack Conway:] "One tough son of a [bleep]."

Heavens! Apparently, that's why Republicans don't join the Army. Those dainty men can't handle the word "bitch". Their ears start bleeding and Jesus weeps. Or something.

If the web ad above is any indication, it's clear that Republicans have nothing on Conway, while pushing the world's most boring fringe nutter.

Game on.

Contribute to Jack Conway
Jack Conway for Senate

Definitely looks like mo' to me.

Heads up: Add Dick Durbin and Carl Levin to the list of Senators backing Elizabeth Warren as Obama's key consumer cop on Wall Street. That makes a total of 15 Senators supporting her. Is momentum building in her favor?

Durbin is notable as the number two Democrat in the Senate. Levin is perhaps even more notable because he's a Wall Street-friendly, pro-financial services industry guy. (Delaware is essentially owned by the credit card companies.)

This decision is Obama's most important regarding the recently passed finance reform law. He can either prove that he means real reform by nominating Warren, or he can side with those who'd rather gut the law by creating an ineffective Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Update: Oops. Levin represents Michigan, not Delaware. In my mind, I had him somehow confused with Carper. Sorry about the mistake.

The Snowe/Collins let them eat cake solution to pay for Medicaid assistance and teacher funding to the states isn't sitting well with House Dems. As a reminder, Snowe and Collins refused to allow the funding to go foward unless the Senate found other offsets to pay for it (incidentally, they are not demanding a similar offset for continuing tax cuts to the rich, go figure).

The Senate took a page from a White House suggestion that the food stamp program be cut for a jobs bill, and offset this aid by cutting $6.7 billion from the food stamp program, ending the boost the program got in the recovery act early, cutting off the bump in funding in 2014. House liberals, back in a quick session this week to pass the critical aid bill, vow to restore the funding in a future bill.

“This is a bitter pill to swallow," Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said in a statement to The Hill. "I fought very hard for the food assistance money in the Recovery Act and the fact is that participation in the food stamps program has jumped dramatically with the economic crisis, from 31.1 million persons to 38.2 million just in one year.....

DeLauro oversees annual spending on the food stamps program as chairwoman of the House Appropriations subcommittee for Agriculture. Asked if she would try to restore the food stamps money in future legislation, DeLauro said, "Yes, absolutely, I will be fighting for these funds."

Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have similar concerns.

"But the good news is that there is time to fix it," said Michael Mershon, a spokesman for Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). "And he is considering legislation to restore the cuts while finding another offset."

House Democratic leaders had resisted earlier suggestions by the Obama administration to redirect food stamp money to the jobs bill. The White House had noted that the 13.6 percent stimulus increase in food stamps was initially designed to last until 2014. It was going to last until 2018 because of unexpectedly low food prices during the recession.

"Their line of argument was, well, the cost of food relative to what we thought it would be has come down, so people on food stamps are getting a pretty good deal in comparison to what we thought they were going to get," said House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) said in a Fiscal Times interview last month.

"Well isn’t that nice," Obey said. "Some poor bastard is going to get a break for a change."

The poor bastards will at least have teachers in their kids' classrooms and a fireman or cop show up at their door in an emergency, even if they might not have enough to adequately feed those kids in a few years. Restoring that food assistance funding is going to be a major challenge for these House Dems, particularly if the Republicans and ConservaDems get their way and extend those tax cuts for the rich.

There's conservation of energy, conservation of mass, and then there's conservation of humor.

For example, first came the Onion article mocking the anti-science position of the right by going to ludicrous extremes.

The second law of thermodynamics, a fundamental scientific principle stating that entropy increases over time as organized forms decay into greater states of randomness, has come under fire from conservative Christian groups, who are demanding that the law be repealed.

Pretty funny stuff. However, as this entry in Conservapedia proves, even professional comedians can only out-crazy the right for so long.

The theory of relativity  is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.

The article then lists a set of "22 counterexamples" (a list that actually contains 24 items) to prove that relativity is relatively wrong. The best two of these proofs have to be items 8 & 9.

8. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement.

9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.

Even more fun than the list of items is the list of footnotes which includes such winners as:

Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold.

Start your countdown timers for the conservative repeal of gravity. And remember to wear Velcro socks.

(h/t to Kombiz Lavasany, who pointed this out on Twitter)

• Fox News v. Ted Olson:

  Ted Olson, who won the Supreme Court case that put Bush in the White House, is a darling of the conservative legal movement. Yet he also partnered with David Boies, his opponent in Bush v. Gore, to argue in favor of overturning Proposition 8 in California. How can such things be?

  That's what Chris Wallace wanted to know when Olson appeared on "Fox News Sunday" yesterday to discuss the case. What ensued was a mutually testy showdown in which both host and guest accused each other of interrupting, misunderstanding the constitution, and failing to grasp the meaning of the phrase "judicial activism." Eventually Olson, in the undisputed line of the segment, was moved to declare "Would you like Fox's right to a free press put up to a vote?" Wallace promptly changed the subject to "the process going forward."

• What a shock:

  National surveys of the Tea Party have found that explicit racist sentiment is a strong component of the tea-party make up, in addition to economic conservatism and strong Republican partisanship.

• Other things that are just too close to Ground Zero:

  In Murfreesboro, Tenn., Republican candidates have denounced plans for a large Muslim center proposed near a subdivision, and hundreds of protesters have turned out for a march and a county meeting.

  In late June, in Temecula, Calif., members of a local Tea Party group took dogs and picket signs to Friday prayers at a mosque that is seeking to build a new worship center on a vacant lot nearby.

  In Sheboygan, Wis., a few Christian ministers led a noisy fight against a Muslim group that sought permission to open a mosque in a former health food store bought by a Muslim doctor.

• While she still won't talk to the traditional press, Sharron Angle did find time to speak at the National Doctors Tea Party:

  Angle’s headlining of the event has raised eyebrows, as the event’s sponsor, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, is a far-right organization that propagates absurd anti-government conspiracy theories. The group has called the establishment of Medicare “evil” and “immoral”; has denied the link between HIV and AIDS; has argued that the FDA is unconstitutional; has promoted “one of Angle’s previously expressed theories that abortion may cause breast cancer“; and has even warned that President Obama may have used a “covert form of hypnosis” to win over voters.

• Who will replace Christina Romer?
• Here's some must-see T.V.:

  After months of watching Republicans hammer President Obama for hitting the links on a weekly basis, Democrats are turning the tables. In an ad launched Monday morning, a duo of progressive groups go after House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) for a golf addiction rivaled by few others.

  The spot, paid for by Blue America and Americans for America and drawing heavily from the MasterCard commercial theme, is airing in Boehner's home district on behalf of his Democratic challenger: attorney and West Point graduate Justin Coussoule.

  "Rounds of golf: 100 plus. Golf expenses: $83,000. Membership at all male club: $75,000. Special interest travel including golf junkets: $159,000. Raising the retirement age to 70 and voting to end unemployment benefits: priceless. For those who want an out-of-touch pro golfer for a Congressman, there's John Boehner. For everyone else, there's Justin Coussoule."

• How many ways do those Constitution-loving Republicans want to change the Constitution?
• The thinned-out herd is fighting back:

  The House Blue Dog Coalition, which is losing an unusual number of members, is aiming to replenish its ranks by making endorsements in a handful of competitive races.

• Some more dirt on Democratic senate candidate Jeff Greene.
• Bad but not unexpected news for Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA):

  The House ethics committee has formally charged California Democrat Maxine Waters with three counts of ethics wrongdoing, including charges that she accepted special favors for a family member.

  The announcement of the charges opens the way for a trial this fall before eight members of the ethics committee — four Democrats and four Republicans.

• It's a good thing that all that talk about global warming is just a hoax:

  A piece of ice four times the size of Manhattan island has broken away from an ice shelf in Greenland, according to scientists in the U.S.  [...]

  The ice island, which is about half the height of the Empire State Building, is the biggest piece of ice to break away from the Arctic icecap since 1962 and amounts to a quarter of the Petermann 70-kilometer floating ice shelf, according to research leader Andreas Muenchow.

• Academy Award winning actress Patricia Neal has died.

The Colorado primary is tomorrow, pitting formerly political unknown incumbent Michael Bennet as the establishment candidate and former speaker of Colorado's state house Andrew Romanoff as the outsider, just adding to the unique nature of Colorado's primary (though the real fun, in the form of crazy, remains on the GOP side, in the governor's race). The last major poll in the Senate race, conducted by Public Policy Polling, gives Bennet a small lead.

Michael Bennet's holding on to a small lead the day before the Democratic primary for US Senate in Colorado, 49-43 over challenger Andrew Romanoff.

Bennet's biggest strength is his support with senior citizens, who could account for as much as a third of the voters tomorrow. He's up 53-41 with them. The incumbent also leads with whites (50-44), women (49-42), and men (48-43). Romanoff's strength is with Hispanics (46-42) and voters between 30-45 (49-43.)

Both candidates are relatively popular with Bennet holding a 57/24 approval rating and Romanoff sporting a 52/27 favorability spread.

With nine percent undecided this late in the game, it could certainly break either way. Interestingly, the poll was conducted over the weekend, Aug 7-8, after Thursday's NYT published a damning story of a bad financial deal the Denver Board of Education took to attempt to shore up its pension fund while Bennet was superintendent, a deal that has cost the school system $140 million, to date. The story has been in local but apparently hasn't caught hold sufficiently to drive down Bennet's numbers.

Bennet immediately pushed back on the story, telling The Colorado Independent that the Times "got it wrong." Romanoff used the story to to launch an attack ad tying Bennet to Wall Street and calling the deal a "big casino bet gone wrong." Romanoff has rapidly closed the polling gap in this race, gaining 15 points since PPP last polled in May, so momentum is on his side. So consider tomorrow's primary a toss-up.

Since I brought it up in the lede, the crazy GOP governor's race is too close to call. The complete unknown Dan Maes is now essentially tied, 40-41, with former favorite former U.S. Rep. Scott McInnis, whose plagiarism scandal has sunk him. Perhaps Maes' growth comes from Coloradoans who share his grand UN bicycle conspiracy theory.

I've read this about 20 times, and it still blows my mind:

King, the Long Island congressman, said that in terms of social issues, the raging controversy over the Arizona border laws is providing more than enough ammunition for Republicans in key districts.

“The Arizona immigration law is there, there’s no reason to be raising an issue of gay rights” as a wedge, he said.

At least King is being open about the fact that the GOP's playbook is to divide the country for short-term political gain. Instead of appealing to hope and a vision for a better, more prosperous country, King and like-minded Republicans are appealing to hate and a offering a message that fuels bigotry and pits Americans against one another.

The most pathetic thing about this is that even though King is embracing bigotry in the name of political expediency, he's making a political mistake. As kos argued in April, Republicans should embrace immigration reform, not nativism. The GOP base is already fired up; declaring jihad against the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group is just plain dumb.

As things stand now, polling shows that Latinos are more supportive of Democrats and the Obama administration than most Americans, but like other supporters, their enthusiasm is tepid. So King and like-minded Republicans are doing Democrats with their fear-mongering. It won't win them any votes they didn't already have, but it will drive up enthusiasm among Latinos and other non-nativist Americans to vote against Republicans.

It seems that every day Republicans push the boundaries of believability. Can they contradict what they said last week? Campaign against their own ideas? Blame others for the effects of policy they implemented?

Yes, yes, and yes.

But no one is doing it better (or worse) than Missouri's own Roy Blunt. You remember Blunt, right? He's the guy who has been in politics since 1972, in Congress since 1996, followed up Tom Delay as House Majority Whip, and made the illustrious CREW list of "most corrupt members of Congress" not just once, but two years in a row. Remember that guy?

Well, Roy Blunt doesn't. His campaign ads talk about Blunt the teacher and Blunt the college president, with no mention of his little 17 year lark in D.C.  How could Roy Blunt have played a major role in the debacles of the last decade? He's a hard charging outsider with support from Michelle Bachman and an itch to see Obama's birth certificate.

But that's not the end of it. As long as Roy Blunt is expecting Missourians to suffer from a couple of decades of collective amnesia, he might as well go all the way and simply deny what he did while on that long, long lost weekend.

Now a candidate for U.S. Senate, Blunt is carefully parsing his past support for the unpopular bank bailout. Blunt's Senate campaign last month accused his Democratic opponent, Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, of "falsely asserting that Roy Blunt supported a $700 billion bailout package."

How dare Carnahan make such an assertion! Only because, um, well...

Before he was against it, U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt was for a 2008 bill authorizing up to $700 billion to shore up banks and other troubled financial institutions.

In fact, Blunt helped negotiate its details and - as House Republican whip - helped round up enough votes to ensure its passage.

In his attempt to reshape himself in the role of Tea Party extremist, Roy Blunt has been forced to distance himself from that DC insider, Roy Blunt. The answer to that title question: apparently Roy Blunt thinks Missourians are very, very stupid.

Yup.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) believes the November elections will likely weed out some of the “most difficult Democrats” that leadership lawmakers have dealt with this Congress.

In an interview with The Hill, the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman expressed confidence that Democrats will retain the House, and suggested he won’t miss some of the Democrats who won’t be back next year.

“I think a lot of the House seats we’re going to lose are those who have been the toughest for the Democrats to pull into line — the Democrats that have been the most difficult,” Waxman said.

It'll be November's biggest irony -- the voters will turn against Democrats in significant numbers because of the economy, or better put, the lack of jobs. But it won't be Democrats who supported a larger (more effective stimulus), or job benefits extensions, or aid to states, or other measures designed to deal with our shitty economy.

Rather, it'll be the Blue Dog Democrats who think their voters care more about deficits than jobs that will take the brunt of this beating. And really, to them, good riddance.

My biggest worry won't be over the size of a decimated Blue Dog caucus, but how many truly good Democrats get taken out as collateral damage.

Hey, ladies, don't want to get raped? Dallas Police Chief David Brown has some advice for you:

“We’re needing to create a message to the victims of these types of crimes...related to, you know, first date, second date, someone you don’t know that well, but you’re at a club, you have a little bit too much to drink, having friends or someone help watch you, and maybe have someone that doesn’t drink in the group.”

Right. So, as usual, when it comes to rape, it's the victim's fault. Maybe she drinks too much. Maybe she dresses the wrong way. If only we could get the message out to women to be more careful, they wouldn't be attacked.

Why is Chief Brown offering this sage advice? Because reports of rape in Dallas have increased 25 percent this year. And naturally, the problem is the women -- those sloppy drunks at the clubs who wouldn't get raped if only they were more careful. Because we all know that when women are raped, it's their fault.

Well, Chief Brown, here's some advice for you if you want to combat the rape problem in your city: stop perpetuating the myth that victims are to blame for rape, and figure out how to get the message out to would-be criminals. That would be a hell of a start.

(h/t Shelby Knox)

Members of Congress are are speaking out on net neutrality and urging the FCC to take the threat to an open Internet that the Google/Verizon deal would have posed and to act on it.

The FCC needs to hear the message not just from members of Congress, but from Congressional leadership and the White House. The political momentum has been almost entirely with the telecoms in the past year. They've coopted 74 members of Congress--all of them Democrats--who signed an industry-drafted letter urging the FCC to abandon efforts to protect Net Neutrality and promote universal broadband access.

We need to blunt that momentum. CREDO action sent out this message to people signing their petition to tell Google "Don't be evil."

Thanks for sending a message to Google. There's something else you can do today to help save the Internet.

A progressive ally in Washington DC who has close ties to leading Democrats has let us know that Democratic leadership is not hearing the public backlash.

In addition to getting Google to back down, it is crucial that we make some noise at the White House so key administration officials will understand that simply ignoring this issue will make it go away.

Can you call the White House right now and ask the President to send a strong message to the FCC backing immediate action to protect net neutrality?

Please call the White House comment line at: 202-456-1111.

Here's a sample script:

My name is ____ and I live in _____. Please tell the President to keep his campaign promise to make net neutrality the law of the land. Our Internet connection should be free of corporate gatekeepers -- and a backroom deal between Verizon and Google puts a free and open internet at risk. The President needs to immediately send a strong message to his FCC backing immediate action to protect net neutrality. Thank you.

Call the White House, and also please call Speaker Pelosi (202-225-0100) and Leader Reid (202-224-3542) and give them the same message. Both Pelosi and Reid have also been strong supporters of net neutrality, but they need to translate that support into pressure on the FCC. Congress isn't going to be able to act to protect the Internet, so the FCC must.

Greg Sargent asks the questions:

That seems to be one of the core political questions in the wake of the overturning of Proposition 8. How can the president continue opposing gay marriage while supporting the decision to strike down Prop 8, on the grounds that it's "discriminatory," as the White House said in a statement last night?

Making it more dicey, the White House statement also said that the president continues to push for "full equality" for gay and lesbian couples. How can that not include support for gay marriage?

The answers are obvious. The president can't continue to hold incompatible positions. Full equality means full equality. Incremental equality is discriminatory.

Sargent links to Michael Shear, who points out that even though the president says he wants to repeal DOMA, he isn't actively pursuing it, and is going along with Congressional leaders who use the tired excuse of political realities. Once again, it's a question of whether or not a president and Congressional leaders actively try to change those political realities.

Pam Spaulding pulls no punches:

Yes, we have a biracial constitutional law scholar for a President who still believes that "god is in the mix" and that separate is equal when it comes to marriage. As we noted earlier, with DOMA cases knocking at the DOJ's door, it's going to be put up or shut up (and shut the wallet by a lot of LGBTs) very soon.

Should also make it interesting for the next White House briefing. Do you think that Robert Gibbs will call on The Advocate's Kerry Eleveld and get someone from the WH on the freaking record?

Wednesday was a great moment in the history of civil rights in this country. But full equality is still but a dream on the horizon, and it remains unclear how far this president will go to help make that dream a reality.

NYT Internal Interoffice Administrative Bureaucratica Communication

MEMORANDUM

TO: Maureen Dowd

FR: Bill Keller

RE: Spock's Wife is in Spain??!!

First, put down that vodka tonic. It's eight in the morning.

Ready to get over that whole thing with plagiarizing Josh Marshall? Get this: Michelle Obama took her daughter to Spain. She was away while Spock had a birthday. Can you imagine? This will be awesome grist for you! You will rise again!

Approach it like this: What kind of woman lets her husband go out drinking with his buddies on his birthday instead of spending it with her? I mean seriously. I don't know about blacks and their cultural habits, but I know in any good proper Irish Catholic family like yours the wife is at home making her man a martini on his birthday. She's not all gutsy. She's not all Harvard. (Try to get that in there) You could use this as a lead in to a follow piece, which maybe could be something like "Michelle goes from Aunt Jemima to Angela Davis." Maybe say it in ebonics for more effect. Hey, here's an idea: use Spanish in your title! Get it? Spain and Spanish! Brilliant!

You need to do some "hint hint" that maybe this marriage is on the rocks. It cannot possibly be the case that two people love each other enough and are strong enough that one of many past and many future birthdays is spent apart without worry. He's cheating. He's gotta be cheating. And if he's cheating, then you know very well that you will have to write something praising him to high heaven. "Bambi becomes a Bull Moose." I'm loving this!

Anyhoo, back to first sista souljah. You know that Rush and the white boys are saying the homegirl from Chicago has gone all ghetto fabulous, so you need to include some obligatory talking points. Say something about optics. Obviously, the American people are gonna look at Michelle Obama in Spain and think..."Wait a minute...why the hell is the First Lady traveling overseas while I'm out of a job! I'm voting Republican!" Put a "some say" in there too about Democrats disapproving.

This will be the hot topic of this year's campaign. Obama is in big, big trouble. She should be at her husband's side, modestly fetching his pipe, slippers, and adult beverage. Especially on his birthday.

Get back to me with a column babe. I'll send over a carton of Marlboro Lights and a couple bottles of Volnay.

Bill

President Barack Obama greets First Lady Michelle Obama and daughter Sasha upon their arrival at a barbecue in celebration of his 49th birthday on the South Lawn of the White House, Aug. 8, 2010
(Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Today's Connecticut day before primary poll from Quinnipiac:

"The Democratic governor's race between Ned Lamont and Dan Malloy is too close to call and the Republican governor's race between Tom Foley and Lt. Gov. Mike Fedele could produce a surprise," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, PhD. "In the Republican Senate contest, it looks like Rob Simmons would need more than a surprise; he would need a miracle to catch Linda McMahon. But in politics, miracles do happen."

Today's poll is primary only, no Dem-Rep matchups.

Here are the Dem numbers, with relatively high MoE of +/- 4.6:

If the Democratic primary for Governor were being held today, would you vote for Dan Malloy or Ned Lamont? (If undecided q1DEM) As of today, would you say that you lean a little more toward Malloy or Lamont? (This table includes "Leaners".)

                    LIKELY DEM PRIMARY VOTERS
                    Tot    Men    Wom
Malloy               42%    38%    44%
Lamont               45     48     44
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      1      1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      -      -      -
DK/NA                12     13     11

That includes 30% who might change their mind.

Who will they run against (MoE +/- 3.8)?

If the Republican primary for Governor were being held today, would you vote for Tom Foley, Mike Fedele, or Oz Griebel? (If undecided q1REP) As of today, would you say that you lean a little more toward Foley, Fedele, or Griebel? (This table includes "Leaners".)

                    LIKELY REP PRIMARY VOTERS
                    Tot    Men    Wom
Foley                38%    43%    33%
Fedele               30     27     33
Griebel              17     18     16
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      -      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      -      -      -
DK/NA                14     12     17

And here, a remarkable 48% might change their mind, so if there is to be an upset, look to the GOP Gov race.

Rob Simmons is getting crushed by McMahon and there's no D contest (it's Dick Blumenthal) on the Sen side. But the last set of polls had all D candidates winning.

Update [2010-8-9 9:33:49 by DemFromCT]: My Left Nutmeg will live host the Q-poll presser at 11 am.

This week, there is supposed to be no Congress. Or Congress-ing, anyway. But there is.

In the House, courtesy of the Office of the Majority Leader:

First Vote of the Week... Tuesday 10:30 – 11:30 a.m.
Last Vote Predicted... Tuesday 2:00 – 3:00 p.m.

MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 2010

On Monday, the House will meet at 7:00 p.m. in pro forma session. No votes are expected in the House.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2010

On Tuesday, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. for legislative business.

Senate Amendment to H.R. 1586 - Education Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act (Reps. Obey/Levin/Waxman – Appropriations/Ways and Means/Energy and Commerce) (Subject to a Rule)

The House is back, and that can mean only one thing: the Congress is a unicameral legislature. Just ask Chris Dodd! The House is back because the Senate wills it to be so.

The House sent the Senate a supplemental appropriations bill with just domestic disaster assistance in it. But the Senate added war money. The House said, "OK, fine, but in that case we also want teacher and Medicaid money." And the Senate said, "Go jump in the lake," and stripped out the teacher and Medicaid money. The House said, "You've got us over a barrel. It's recess time and you're giving us the old 'we need 60 votes' routine," and passed the supplemental and left town. Then the Senate turned around and stripped out the contents of an old House bill, rewrote it to appropriate that teacher and Medicaid money, passed it, and left town, meaning the House now has to come back to DC to deal with what the Senate dropped for them on their way out the door.

But don't ask for Senate rules reform, anyone! That'll turn Congress into a unicameral body, unlike the congenial and cooperative body it is today!

Though under normal circumstances it could be expected to pass easily, Politico sees its mission as sowing doubt about it by agitating at the fault lines:

Even though party leaders expect that approval will be a slam-dunk, some early responses from rank-and-file Democrats have raised red flags about the optics of returning to a special session to vote on more spending — even if it’s framed as saving teachers’ jobs.

The risk for Democrats as they seek to bolster their flagging election prospects is that some of their vulnerable members will feel like they have to walk the plank, yet again, on a politically unpopular economic-stimulus agenda, while reminding voters of their failure to handle routine budget work this year.

Ultimately, it's a pretty good bet that the bill will pass without much difficulty. Bills rarely get to the floor unless the leadership is pretty sure they know the outcome ahead of time, and calling the House back into session for a loss isn't a scenario they're likely to walk into accidentally. Still, there's some value to the Politico piece, in that it serves to remind us that the Members most likely to be grousing to Politico about wanting to screw their fellow Democrats over on this vote are the same ones who'll later scream that they're the most vulnerable come election time, and therefore will be needing a million or two of their fellow Democrats' money so that they can come back next year and screw them again on some other votes.

Just a thought!

The House has nothing but this one item scheduled for consideration during this emergency session, but speaking as we were about congenial and cooperative relations, word is that Rep. Tom Price (R-GA-06) will insist on holding the House over for more work, specifically, a resolution demanding that they do less work.

Yes, Price wants to offer a privileged resolution that he's selling as a way to "prevent" the House from passing controversial legislation in a lame duck session following the election. Of course, his resolution doesn't really do that. It asks the House to "pledge" not to reconvene except in case of emergency (like perhaps another Terri Schiavo situation, I guess), but that's it.

And by the way, it takes Price nine pages to express this sentiment, which as we all know is a howling outrage to Republicans, and reason in itself to oppose a bill. Too many words = evil socialisms. Why nine pages? Price is trying to pretty up this stupid thing with a litany of standard GOP complaints about how life sucks for the minority in the House. So much so, apparently, that they feel entitled to ask for pay checks for a two month no-show period from November through January as compensation. Fiscal responsibility! Woo!

Anyway, no committee meetings are scheduled for the week. The Senate remains in recess, and the House should be back out of town by Tuesday evening.