Note Archives, updated weekly.

E-mail us: Tips, Compliments, Complaints.

Before you go thinking that The Note is leading with another ill-chosen metaphor ("Who uses glue on a tent?"), recognize that we chose it purposefully.

Because as much as the tax issue normally serves as a binding stickum holding together a diverse coalition, when the party begins to fight about taxes, well, things can get ugly faster than a Tennessee Waltz, as big as all Texas, and imbued on all sides with a certain Iowa stubbornness.

We are about to tell you about a Tax Day Eve story that by Note standards is huge, but there is going to be some cognitive dissonance and incredulity as we go through it, because you are going to say, "If this story is so big, why isn't it all over the newspapers?"

Truthfully, we can't entirely explain why that is, particularly since it involves major dissension in the Republican party, something about which the Washington press corps normally gets all hot and bothered writing.

Of course, the crush of news from Iraq has a lot to do with this, and the fact that much of what happened occurred in the news cycle darkness of last Friday evening.

Still, what happened was both interesting and important, and attention must be paid.

Let's review what happened on Friday in the most basic terms, after giving you this Note Classic Flashback, taking you all the way back to … ..Friday's Note, when the topic was the budget blueprints containing the president's cherished tax cuts hanging in the balance:

"Events are swirling too fast and the possible outcomes are too varied for us to spell them out here, but suffice to say, some deals still need to be cut."

Deals were indeed cut, and not everyone was happy about it.

So, to go back, in the wee hours of Friday morning, first, the House passed it's budget blueprint with $550 billion in tax cuts.

Then the Senate Republican leadership determined that they didn't have the votes to pass any more than $350 billion in tax cuts, because they were suffering 4 defections, to the Democrats' 1.

Then, a period of un-GOP-like chaos ensued for several hours, during which, because of major underreporting, much is darkness. There's still a lack of clarity; we don't really know what happened.

There seem to have been many heated discussions involving Republican senators, the House, the White House's lobbying team, and others.

It all ended (or so it seemed) with Senator Grassley, the Finance chair, giving his word to Senators Snowe and Voinovich that no tax cut bigger than $350 would be allowed to emerge in the final budget deal.

That got Snowe and Voinovich to vote for the senate budget, which passed 51-50. (If an economic turnaround occurs and can be plausibly credited to the Bush 2003 budget, perhaps Vice President Cheney will steal Al Gore's line about "momentary panic" before he voted to break an earlier budget deadlock in the senate.)

That produced some of the most amazing press releases we have ever read, from the offices of Speaker Hastert and Leader DeLay, spewing vitriol onto Senator Grassley for making a deal they claimed involved free-lancing around the leadership.

All of this has gotten some amount of attention, but what really interests The Note is what happened next.

At a late hour, after the Rosenbaum/Dewar dispatches had been put to bed, Senator Frist's office sent out a statement.

Key paragraph five of Statement One from Frist:

"Crafting this new approach resulted in almost daily challenges requiring long discussions and innovative solutions in a fast moving environment. Yesterday was such a day as we moved to put the final pieces in place. Last night, for example, I was made aware of information that I should have immediately passed on to the House leadership. Not doing so created confusion."

Key paragraph five of a Revised Statement Two from Frist, labeled "FINAL — Disregard Previous Statement"

"Crafting this new approach resulted in almost daily challenges requiring long discussions and innovative solutions in a fast moving environment. Yesterday was such a day as we moved to put the final pieces in place. Last night, for example, I was made aware of information that I should have immediately passed on to the House leadership."

So apparently, the confusion was cleared up in the twenty-two minutes between the two statements. Or something.

Anyone want to tell us what happened in the intervening time?

This this raises questions (which Democrats in the senate have been trying to raise for weeks) about Senator Frist's (and the White House's) control over the senate flock.

Which leads us to say: Happy Anniversary, Dr./Leader/Senator Frist!

His hometown paper noticed yesterday what the rest of us missed: all of this happened pegged to Frist's first 100 days in office, and the reviews are mixed. LINK

"The surgeon-turned-senator's style, steeped in an even-tempered demeanor, has won bipartisan praise among colleagues. They also say Frist, 51, exudes compassion and has a strong work ethic. "

"But while Frist's style points are through the roof, reviews on the substance of his first three months as majority leader are closer to earth. Frist has had mixed results in moving the Republican agenda set by close ally President Bush, and key setbacks have overshadowed his successes."

Dr. Frist's counterpart in the House was none too pleased with last week's results on the budget resolution.

"House Majority Leader Tom Delay, R-Texas, was furious with the Senate GOP leadership's failure to gain support for the larger tax cut, saying what finally passed Friday was a "secret tax plan" that was "inconsistent with the agreement reached by the House and Senate" earlier in the week."

We thought maybe the Wall Street Journal , having had all weekend to think about things and report, would tell the world what happened Friday, but their story doesn't even contain the word "Frist"!!!

It DOES talk about how House Republicans haven't given up yet on finding a way to work around the Grassley Promise, however, which seems to be the White House's only hope to turn things around.

The president needs a tax cut bigger than $350 for substantive reasons, but also for purposes of political momentum. We would be delighted to see SAOs try to claim that $350 is a huge win for the president's vision, and enough to allow the economy to grow, but we think that would be tough for them to do.

A perceived loss on any issue matters a lot to this White House (more than to most, because maintaining the air of the Bush Infallibility is key), but a loss on taxes would be brutal.

Ever since Ronald Reagan changed the GOP forever, taxes have been, as we said, the uniting dogma of the party. The Democrats have nothing like it, and it has been a major part of the Republican mojo for a quarter century.

The end of the Cold War (and thus the diminishing of the GOP trump card on national security) made taxes all the more important to the party.

Arguably, every presidential election since Reagan has hinged on the "lower taxes" mantra, often coupled with the "and less government" add on.

There was Walter Mondale's "he won't tell you, I just did."

Then, in 1988, George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis about the head and shoulders with the tax issue.

1992 was perfectly framed by "read my lips" and Bill Clinton's middle class tax cut.

The sausage-making-on-display of Bob Dole's settling on his heart-felt (not) "15, 15, 15%" tax cut, after a parade of tax advisers showed up at his Capitol Hill campaign headquarters to lobby him on a series of plans in which he apparently didn't believe. This exposed a good deal about the kind of candidate Dole was, and the kind of president he would have been.

And of course the power of the tax issue (and those lovable Tax Families, one of which George W. Bush had in every port and on every tarmac in America) made Al Gore into more of a liberal than anything else Bush talked about.

And tax cuts for this President are not just the centerpiece of his economic recovery and stimulus plan: it wouldn't be an overstatement to say that right now, pre-election, it IS the plan.

With Medicare reform and other hard measures apparently being saved for the Holy Grail of the/a second term, much is riding on the 2003 tax cuts.

Which brings us to the day's most politically important story, in which Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei sneak onto the very bottom of the Washington Post 's front-page with a must-read so must-readable we shall now lapse into major excerpts, but you should really read it all.

"President Bush toppled the Iraqi dictatorship in 21 days. Getting his domestic agenda through the United States Congress won't be quite so easy." LINK

"Emboldened by the rapid military success, the president plans to use his new popularity to fight for his undiluted agenda of deep tax cuts, Medicare reform and strict limits on domestic spending. But the Iraq war has had an equally profound effect on the opposition. Democrats have concluded that the only way to challenge the popular war leader is to fight him vigorously on domestic policy."

"The result is an approaching train wreck, officials in both branches of government say. … "

"The dilemma was on full display Friday. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) announced that under no circumstances would the Senate approve a tax cut this year of more than $350 billion. His promise makes it likely that Bush's proposed $726 billion tax cut will be reduced by more than half, probably ending the president's hope of eliminating the tax on stock dividends. … ."

"'He'll come out very strong,' said Charlie Black, a GOP lobbyist who counsels the White House. As for compromise, Black said, 'It's not his nature to do that.' Black said that with events in Iraq calming down, Bush will likely be working the phones to lawmakers and making road trips to places such as Maine or Ohio, home of holdout Sens. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio), who have so far blocked Bush's full tax cut."

It doesn't strike us that that kind of trip would sway the independent minds of Snowe and Voinovich, but what do we know?

Snowe got more sainthood treatment from Janet Hook in yesterday's Los Angeles Times . LINK

Worse for the White House and Frist The Kennebec Journal printed it today. LINK

And the Beacon Journal's Michael Douglas defends "Voinovich Republicans." LINK

This next part of Milbank/VandeHei is going to race the adrenaline of Democratic strategists who want to paint this Bush Administration as out of touch on the economy and unaware of how much the middle class is hurting:

"White House officials believe it may not be necessary for them to win passage of many domestic policies for Bush to win reelection next year. Because the economy is stronger now than in 1991, they say, Bush is in a better position than his father was, when a successful war in the Persian Gulf was not enough to prevent a poor economy from scuttling the elder Bush's reelection."

"'The state of the economy is fundamentally, totally different,' a senior Bush aide said. 'It's just a different reality, with fewer opportunities for Democrats to take the president down.' As a result, the aide said, Bush will benefit from merely demonstrating that, unlike his father, he has a 'busy agenda,' even if it does not pass. That means no compromises unless there is no alternative … ."

"Most economists and analysts, however, said the economy could be a hindrance for Bush if it is not growing at a rapid pace within a year … ."

"Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), once considered Bush's secret weapon in Congress because of their close friendship, has irritated many House Republicans by failing to rein in the president's GOP critics in the Senate. Bush and his top aides, in turn, are seen by many lawmakers as arrogant and dismissive of Congress."

And is Ed Rollins suddenly advising Congress? Look at this:

"Some Republicans are beginning to see their interests diverge from Bush's. When the White House declined to include money for struggling airlines in a supplemental spending bill, lawmakers decided to add it themselves. That tension is forecast to continue as Republican lawmakers defy White House budget-cutters by backing popular programs that could help their own reelections."

"'For a long time, they let the president have whatever he wanted,' said a GOP lobbyist close to the White House. 'Now, they're doing what they think is right.' On spending issues, the lobbyist said, 'there might not be the kind of unanimity people would expect.'"

"A number of Republicans urge Bush to take a more conciliatory approach to Congress. 'He has to lower his expectations,' said one Senate GOP aide. 'It's not going to be the resounding victory at home that was achieved on the battlefield. It's attrition, not shock and awe.'"

"Shock and awe," we Note, has replaced "perfect storm" as the de rigueur clichéd sound bite/quote staple.

Ain't no backing down, however, the Post duo closes: "But Bush aides say they plan no changes. Upfront compromise 'hasn't worked for us in the past,' and Bush's confidence in his proposals is unwavering, said one senior official."

"White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, asked whether Bush has accepted that he's unlikely to get the full elimination of the dividend tax, replied: 'I would not conclude that, no. The president believes that there should still be, and will fight for, a 100 percent dividend exclusion.'"

Carving out a little piece of this, Robin Toner in the New York Times says that fixing the ticking time bomb of Medicare is going to be tough even for "a president coming off a wartime surge in popularity." LINK

And lest all those poll numbers floating around make you think the president is going to have an easy time of it, the president's political advisers know a short-term bump when they see it.

But still do read the Wall Street Journal for John Harwood's write up of the new WJS/NBC poll, showing all presidential indices boats being lifted by the rising patriotic tide coming out of the war, although with a mixed verdict on tax cuts.

Big Casino budget politics:

The Wall Street Journal story, while missing the Frist angle altogether, does have this newsmaking stuff:

"Discussions already are under way in the Senate about the details of a $350 billion plan. There is widespread support for Mr. Bush's proposals to boost the small-business expensing limit and to speed up an increase in the child tax credit and relief for married taxpayers, both provided in the 2001 tax package. Democrats and Republicans agree on accelerating most of the 2001 cuts in individual income-tax rates. Democrats would prefer to exclude the top two rates, but may concede in exchange for a substantial package of aid to ailing states."

The Washington Post editorial page marc(u)s down that it at least is paying attention, with a lead piece praising Grassley, but denouncing the setting of a floor on the tax cut level, DAFATECS (once more: "deficits as far as the eye can see"), and the "farce" of the GOP budget process.. LINK

Bob Novak seems awfully forgiving of the "last deficit hawk," Ohio Senator Voinovich, even if the Buckeye does not accept Bob's supply side theocracy. LINK

The AP reports that, according to it's recent poll of 1017 adults, while 50% of Americans think their taxes are too high, 61% are against additional tax cuts given the burdens of a pricey war and a yawning budget deficit. Poll LINK

"The poll, taken in the days before tomorrow's tax deadline, found that 61 percent say it would be better to hold off on additional tax cuts right now to avoid making budget deficits worse and ensure there is adequate money to pay for the war."

"Half that many, 31 percent, said they think it is more important to pass more tax cuts to give people more money to spend and to stimulate the economy … "

"A majority of those who think taxes are too high and a majority of Republicans said they preferred holding off on additional tax cuts right now."

The economy:

How many times can the Wall Street Journal put the same story on A1 or A2?

Today's "version" is by Jon Hilsenrath, and it says the American economy just might get better after the war with Iraq, but, then again, it might not, depending on what happens with profits, consumer spending, housing, state and local government fiscal situations, and SARS.

The politics of war:

The first Bumiller/Sanger/Stevenson triple byline? LINK

Since January 1, 1995, there have been

15 Bumiller and Sanger bylines
7 Stevenson and Sanger bylines
and
3 Bumiller and Stevenson bylines

But this three-headed beast appears to be a first. The Three Amigos tick tock the war from the 1600 point of view.

Pee Wee's (very) Big Adventure. LINK

The only discordant Note in the face of America's shared jubilation over the release of the POWs is that now Peter Baker's emotional conversations with David Kendall and Mickey Kantor are no longer the journalistic high point of his career.

Al Kamen says that Washington's most celebrity-oriented landlord (Pride of the South M. Tutwiler) is headed to be Baghdad message czar. LINK

In case you skipped the Saturday paper and thus missed what Karl Rove told the the newspaper editors about war and peace: LINK

Those twin issues threaten to "cleave" the Democratic Party like no time since their Vietnam-era divisions, according to a big-think piece by the Los Angeles Times ' Mark Z. Barabak. LINK

This is a quagmire Democrats don't want to get stuck in, partly because they know what happened last time: the Post World War II "Democratic consensus" broke apart.

"While polls show strong overall backing for the ongoing military action, even among Democrats, self-described liberals are less supportive than those who identify themselves as politically moderate or conservative. Liberals — the Democratic Party base — are also more tolerant of antiwar dissent and much less supportive of Bush, according to a recent Los Angeles Times poll."

The Des Moines Register 's Beaumont sees the debate shifting to how to rebuild Iraq. LINK

Howard Dean, for one, believes the divisions will endure. LINK

ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary:

There was an explosion of Invisible Primary clips this weekend and today, and The Note simply couldn't digest them all.

Here is a representative sample, and if you feel your candidate was slighted, let us know.

Some Los Angeles Times reporter named "Brownstein" seems to have a must-read this morning on the Democrats and ideas.

We say: keep your eye on this Brownstein kid — he might just have a future in the column business.

Today's piece posits position pulls (and thus we end our Peter Piper effort … ) and pushes among the Democratic candidates before too long. LINK

Ron correctly says about the frenetic travel the Democratic candidates are already engaged in: "Yet for all the activity, the contest still feels as if it is in exhibition season. Historically, the race for a party's nomination doesn't crystallize until the candidates begin contesting each other's ideas." hose debates create the contrasts that help voters sort out their allegiances — and the confrontations that show which candidates can take, and return, a punch."

True enough, but the areas of the potential difference Ron cites (guns, trade, environment, taxes), or, more to the point, the nature of the "disagreements" between the candidates, are the kinds of "votes and quotes" "distinctions that the campaigns are sure to bring up, but don't really raise politics to their highest and best."

Still, Brownstein didn't just make this stuff up, or do all his own opposition research, and this piece is a must-read if only because it previews some attacks one is likely to hear by the time of the Keene Pumpkin Festival. LINK

And Brownstein sneaks in a really key "privately" sentence: "And privately, the hawks (who also include Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri) are itching to join Dean in accusing Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, who has blown hot and cold on the war, of trying to have it both ways. An aide to one Democratic hawk predicts that opponents will eventually accuse Kerry of trying to straddle tough choices — using his swings on the war as Point 1."

The Kansas City Star's Steve Kraske reports from Fort Dodge, Iowa, where it seems all the house parties and college campuses have at least one Democratic candidate hanging out. LINK

"Candidate activity picked up in Iowa after the fall of Baghdad last week, although the campaigns of several candidates said the trips were planned in advance."

Here's the WSJ/GE horserace paragraph: "There has been little change in opinion on the race for the Democratic nomination. Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut holds a modest lead with 19%; compared with 14% for Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri; 13% for Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts; 4% each for Senator John Edwards of North Carolina and former Senator Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois; and 3% each for Senator Bob Graham of Florida and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean."

GRAHAM

Does this mean there will be no press van?

Senator Bob Graham is set to make his inaugural presidential campaign trip to the Granite State this Thursday and Friday. And he's taking the unusual route of trying to keep it "under the radar," said the Nashua Telegraph yesterday. LINK

The Miami Herald 's Tyler Bridges reports that Senator Graham is in California raising money and "said that he will spend 80 percent of his time raising money through the fall." LINK

There is a sense of possibilities and even wonder in Mr. Bridges' lead: "It will likely be simply one of the thousands of speeches that U.S. Senator Bob Graham gives in a political career that began in 1966."

Mark Silva of the Orlando Sentinel also reports on Graham's fundraising journey, but he also Notes the Senator testing the waters on foreign policy. LINK

Graham told a Miami-Dade County synagogue Saturday, "We threw a few cruise missiles into the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan . . . that's what we may have to do in Syria."

He began to campaign in California this weekend. "'He has friends here in California,' said Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party. 'Does he have the name-identification that a John Kerry or Howard Dean has? No,' Torres said. 'That is going to take time and money.'"

Graham is SERIOUS about this, folks. We hear that he just might have already hired Jay "Mad Dog" Howser, known to some Democrats one of the more dogged opposition researchers in the business, and probably the only one to be called a pimp by Gov. Fob James.

Howser, a Missouri native, began his political career in Alabama, working for then-soon-to-be governor Don Siegelman. He worked in Al Gore's research shop in 2000, and then worked for the late Senator Paul Wellstone. A Democrat who knows him warns opposing campaigns to watch out for Howser's blue Chrysler LeBaron convertible

The Palm Beach Post looks at top historical hard money donors to Graham. LINK

KERRY

Former senatorial candidate Alex Sanders announced his support for John Kerry's presidential bid with an alliterative endorsement. LINK

"In a statement, Sanders said he chose Kerry for three reasons: "courage, compassion and charisma."

"John Kerry, his family and his campaign were enormously helpful to me during my run for the U.S. Senate," Sanders said. "I saw firsthand how well he connected with and how well he was received by South Carolinians last year when he campaigned for me."

The Boston Globe 's Jacoby finds intellectual incoherence in Senator Kerry's remarks on judges and abortion.

"In fact, a litmus test — an ideological hurdle that he would require any Supreme Court nominee to clear — is precisely what it is. There are serious legal scholars, not all of them prolife, who think Roe was poorly reasoned and wrongly decided — that it essentially conjured the "constitutional" right to abortion out of thin air. Kerry was making an explicit promise not to nominate such people to the Supreme Court, no matter how sterling their credentials or how admirable their character. That is a litmus test, however much Kerry might deny it.'" LINK

"But why deny it? Are litmus tests really so bad? It seems to me that it's reasonable for a president to appoint judges who agree with him on important issues. Don't voters expect as much? Instead of denying the obvious, Kerry could have made it a mark of his commitment. 'Sure it's a litmus test. That's because I don't want there to be any doubt where I stand: I will protect Roe v. Wade.' If he had said that, I for one would have defended his frankness."

And Kerry continues to get some rough — mostly editorial and op-ed — treatment in the New England media.

The Keene Sentinel asks Kerry to define "properly" — as in — President Bush didn't go about diplomacy "properly." LINK

While the Manchester Union Leader calls him an "ass." LINK

And the Union Leader's Bernadette Malone compares him to Mohammed Saeed Sahhaf, the Iraqi information minister, for want[ing] judges to uphold the interpretation of the last group of judges. LINK

Senator Kerry "delivered his first campaign speech to South Carolina Democrats Sunday" with a "rousing message heavy with Democratic ideals," the Spartanburg Herald-Journal reports. LINK

"He spoke of his desire to provide affordable health care, revamp public schools and roll back President Bush's tax cuts."

The AP's Julie Halenar finds that Kerry "was peppered with questions on foreign policy, the war in Iraq and future tax cuts" in South Carolina. LINK

On Friday night, The Note was hanging out in the ABC News War Room when we got this curious e-mail message from Senator John Kerry.

Dear [Note]," it read, "I wanted to let you know that I will be coming to South Carolina over the next few days. While North Carolina is also critical to helping me win the nomination, I must be successful in early caucus and primary states like South Carolina. In the coming months I will be asking for your help in North Carolina as well as some of your neighboring states."

Huh? North Carolina?

A little while later, we got another e-mail. But it started like this:

"I wanted to let you know that I will be coming to South Carolina over the next few days. While Georgia is also critical to helping me win the nomination, I must be successful in early caucus and primary states like South Carolina. In the coming months I will be asking for your help in Georgia as well as some of your neighboring states."

About an hour later, we received a third e-mail: "Please disregard our earlier message as it was sent mistakenly to John Kerry supporters in your state."

Kind of makes you miss the old Word Perfect mail merge functions, eh?

DEAN

Gov. Howard the Dean became Howard-the-Duck-out-of-water in South Florida this weekend, according to the St. Pete Times. LINK

But he warmed to his crowd.

"So how does this 54-year-old doctor from a state less populated than Pinellas County campaign in South Florida, Graham's home base?"

"By saying only flattering things when asked about Graham and using the same bluntness he uses everywhere else. Nothing better to excite activists tired of party leaders they see as too timid about challenging President Bush's agenda."

EDWARDS

John Wagner writes in Sunday's Raleigh News and Observer that Senator Edwards will a) go to New Mexico Tuesday to meet with Bill Richardson and enjoy a fundraiser co-hosted by Attorney General Patricia Madrid, who is set as Edwards' New Mexico campaign chairwoman, and b) that the Senator seems no closer to a decision about his bid for senate re-election in the face of his presidential campaign, although he plans to finish his current term, regardless of whispered scenarios. LINK

The Columbia State's Lee Bandy wrote yesterday that Senator John Edwards is way serious about the South (and South Carolina). LINK

Bandy quotes Edwards explaining it all:

"'If you have a candidate who's appealing in the South,' he said, 'it makes them appealing to mainstream America, appealing to every other swing state around the country because that means they have a set of values and a message that is going to be appealing elsewhere.'"

As Bandy writes …

"Edwards is counting on the early South Carolina primary, set for Feb. 3, to boost his chances. He is from North Carolina and was born in Seneca, S.C."

"The caucus system here has typically held little sway because it was held late in the primary season. But it took sudden importance when state party leaders moved up the date to right after New Hampshire."

… And Notes that Edwards is courting the black vote in particular:

"South Carolina is the first state on the calendar, he noted, where there's a significant African-American population. 'It would be a mistake to write off the South for that one reason,' he said."

Bandy says that Edwards "delivered his standard stump speech promising quality health care for all, a $50 billion program to bail out economically depressed states, tax cuts only for the middle-income, pay equity for women and appointment of federal judges who will enforce civil rights laws," and lists a few other Edwards stances: no litmus test for Supreme Court nominees; the economy and homeland security are the keys to the election; a moment of silent prayer in schools is good; a diverse Cabinet and staff is a must.

The Boston Globe 's Adrian Walker yesterday wrote up Senator Edwards' hectic Friday (campaigning in South Carolina, voting in D.C., campaigning in North Carolina), only to find a host of unswayed onlookers mingled with the gung-ho supporters at a local art gallery. LINK

Walker offered up the Edwards bio and his "classic centrist" stance, then assessed his contradictory status as media favorite yet national virtual unknown; relatively untried, yet relatively Clintonesque.

(For full accuracy, check out the Globe's correction LINK)

The Charlotte Observer's Jennifer Talhelm reported yesterday on Senator John Edwards' abbreviated trip to South Carolina, which he called "'our New Hampshire.'" LINK

Talhelm covered Edwards' visit to "a poor, largely black region of northeastern South Carolina" and his hasty trip back to the Hill to vote on the budget, then summed up the state's importance:

"It's the first early primary where he has an advantage because he is Southern, born in Seneca, S.C. A win would show campaign donors and the media he can appeal to blacks, moderate whites and Southerners."

"A candidate who can win a Southern primary could have a chance at taking an all-important Southern state in the general election, one key to a win. But a bad showing in South Carolina would damage Edwards for the rest of the campaign, analysts say."

"'South Carolina is essential to John Edwards,' said University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato. 'There simply is no excuse for Edwards to lose South Carolina.'"

Talhelm also wrote that Edwards has made a strong effort to shore up support and endorsements in the state, and still holds hope that Rep. Jim Clyburn will back him, despite Clyburn's "all but" endorsement of Dick Gephardt last month.

"'He's a friend and a terrific leader, and obviously he's important,' Edwards said. 'But Congressman Clyburn told me he hasn't endorsed Gephardt.'"

Edwards is proposing more money to help "ease" the financial burden of soldiers. LINK

Chet Guinn of Des Moines is looking for a real Democrat:

"North Carolina Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards is a quintessential example of the flawed logic that is all too prevalent among my fellow Democrats. On one hand, he correctly identifies and deplores President Bush's small circle of elite decision-makers making a mockery of Abraham Lincoln's definition of American democracy — a government of, by and for the people. On the other hand, he votes consistently in the Senate to give that small group (the military-industrial complex about which Dwight Eisenhower warned us) obscene amounts of money to escalate the arms race and to undermine the international community." LINK

The Greensboro News and Record's Eric Dyer yesterday evaluated Senator Edwards' hawkish Iraq stance as a help or hindrance in the long battle for the White House, considering the Scylla of Howard Dean and the primary and the Charybdis of President Bush's popularity and the general. LINK

LIEBERMAN

Senator Lieberman will speak to ANGLE, a powerful Los Angeles gay political group, in late May, the group announced.

The Hartford Courant's David Lightman traveled to Iowa to see how the hawkish Senator Lieberman is playing in the Hawkeye State after the fall of Baghdad. LINK

"The Iraq war should be a political triumph for Joe Lieberman. But he spent the days after the fall of Baghdad in Iowa, the so-called peace state, and too often found that his stance for war magnified his other political troubles here."

Mr. Lightman goes on to say Senator Lieberman's ideology is not the only obstacle he faces in Iowa.

"His campaign has stymied by quirky logistical tangles — his first scheduled 2003 trip was to have begun on the day the space shuttle Columbia exploded. It was canceled."

"The rescheduled visit went on two weeks later, but without his staff, stuck in Washington in a snowstorm. Last week's trip was cut short because the senator had to rush back to Washington for a rare Friday afternoon vote, so a crowd that had gathered in Ames heard son Matt Lieberman address them by speakerphone instead."

Kristin Carvell has, the Concord Monitor says, been tapped to become the Lieberman campaign's New Hampshire press secretary.

The Myrtle Beach Sun News' Dawn Bryant hits the trail with Senator Lieberman in Mullins, S.C., where he stressed "his support for affirmative action and desire to make the American dream possible for everyone," the Myrtle Beach Sun News reports. LINK

GEPHARDT

After seeing 10 of his colleagues line up behind Senator Lieberman followed by Howard Dean rolling out his first House endorsement, Congressman Gephardt decided it was time to whip his endorsement operation into shape.

Roll Call 's Erin Billings reports that the Gephardt camp sees Leader Pelosi as a key component to its overwhelming endorsement game plan. LINK

Gephardt, per the AP, was "tearing" into Bush on the economy. LINK

Congressman Gephardt took his act to New Hampshire this weekend too.

LINK

In Iowa, Rep. Gephardt took the president to task for his tax cuts, and stayed, more or less, on message. LINK

SHARPTON

Why Did. Rev. Al Sharpton miss his meeting with "young minority journalists?" LINK

Is there double standard at work here again?

Politics

Just to make Robert Gibbs nostalgic, Sunday's Columbia State put some pressure on Senator Fritz Hollings to make up his mind on a re-election run. LINK

The Washington Post 's Mike Allen hears that top Republicans think some comments from Senate Daschle about Bush and the war in Iraq "have left him more vulnerable than ever to a possible challenge next year" by former Congressman John Thune. LINK

The New York Daily News writes that Gov. Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg had a cordial "double date" at the Post House restaurant with Libby Pataki and Diana Taylor. LINK

The New York Daily News reports that Rep. Peter King won't challenge Senator Chuck Schumer, due to the financial hurdle of running against a well-funded, well-known opponent. LINK "'I had to use my head rather than my heart,' King said. 'Even with everything going the right way with raising the money and getting around the state, it still would've been less than 50-50 — though I don't mind those odds.'"

The decision allowed Schumer to be gracious: "'Peter King is a fine person and I look forward to continuing to work with him on so many of the issues we fight for together.'"

More evidence that we were foolish to believe Frank Luntz when he invited us to that party "celebrating" his retirement from politics. LINK

Webby Award Update:

The effort continues, and thanks for all who voted and posted on the site on Friday and over the weekend. Number 75, you know who you are, and we love you.

Even subtracting the double postings (We aren't sure why that keeps happening, but it's not just our voters … ), we made our shared goal of 60 postings by COB ET on Friday. So thanks.

Still, the weekend activity was low and we need to keep the momentum going.

And we lost some serious percentage points since Friday.

Besides Voting The Note if you haven't voted yet, please post a comment.

We had some Notable names post over the weekend (thanks), but we'd like more. We L-O-V-E the China posting, and as to the suggestion about an all-Ukranian Note, all we can say is, we've moved it up the food chain.

If you work for a member of Congress, get your MOC to post something please.

Remember: there is a long way to go, and our lead, frankly, did we mention, was dented over the weekend.

Running up the quantity of the Post ings; adding some glam ones; and getting our total above 70% are this week's triad goals.

Let's get to it — when The Note wins a webby, we all win.

Click here, register (the number of required fields is low), and then vote. LINK

Bush Administration strategy/personality:

The Wall Street Journal defends Rod Paige: "Mr. Paige's real sin here, of course, is not simply his belief that Christian values might be a good thing for kids today, or that public schools might have a harder time teaching values. It is in daring to challenge a secular sacred cow — and then refusing to back down."

Robert Bartley lumps the president's critics with (heavens!) Derrida, and calls them "dullards."

According to the New York Daily News ' Rush and Molloy, the beloved Bloomberg party will now be reeeaaaally hard to get into, and even if you do talk your way in, maybe no sushi. LINK

Elizabeth Drew favorably reviews the two new books about Karl Rove, his brain, and President Bush, and his Brain. Is Rove Nixonian? Maybe, she concludes. [But] "More important than Rove's personal character, though, is that the brilliant visionary who, with manic energy, remade the politics of the state of Texas -recruiting candidates, throwing opponents on the defensive, raising vast amounts of money-is now trying to do the same thing to the nation." LINK

* The Ties That Bind