Of course not personally, but Edwards does have a substantial financial problem if he continues to compete against Obama and Clinton. Edwards' personal fortune cannot help him out because of his acceptance of the $50 million spending cap during the primaries (through to the Democratic National Convention in late August).

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s biggest challenge in Iowa may be the Iraq war and her reputation as a hawk. She tries to dodge the single most important issue in the 2008 race; she knows it is her Achilles heel. When asked at the Iowa Democratic Party Central Committee meeting this morning (Saturday), she almost apologized for her 2002 vote authorizing Bush to use force against Iraq. Almost. She said she takes "responsibility" for the vote and said she would not have voted that way had she’d known what she does now. But she added that there are no "do-overs" in life, and we need to discuss what to do now.

It was just dumb luck that I got to have a personal, 5-minute conversation with Hillary. I just happened to be grabbing a cup of coffee as she was exiting the building, and I struck up a conversation over her hawkish reputation as she shook my hand. To tell you the truth, I was surprised at how personable she is in conversation, unhurried and very at ease. I think her new Iowa Director, JoDee Winterhof, is not yet confident enough with Hillary to pull her away from worthless conversations with party activists like me.

Dr. Selden Spencer, a neurologist and humanitarian from Huxley, Iowa, is running in Iowa's 4th Congressional District because of the 650,000 estimated Iraqis that have died because of our invasion and occupation.
http://www.spencerforcongress.com/...

So what do the hard-nosed general and mild-mannered physician have in common? They both are intelligent men who love their country and love peace. Both General Clark and Dr. Spencer have learned that we need more diplomacy and economic development to address our problems in the Middle East.

http://files.spencerforcongress.com/...

As we head into the final days of the campaign, we need to gather sufficient funds to run the ad on local radio stations, particularly in the rural areas of the 4th District (most of it), where many people get their local news from their local radio stations. Compared to broadcast TV, radio ads are a bargain and an effective tool to reach voters.

Contribute to airing the ad on local radio stations by going to the special ActBlue page set up by WesPAC:

http://www.actblue.com/...

1. I would like to see Dean as Chair of DNC, with Donna Brazile as Co-Chair.

2. I would like to see John Kerry as Senate Minority Leader.

3. I would like to have all of our best candidates run for Senate in 2006 if they are going after an open seat or have a chance of upsetting a sitting Republican.

4. For House seats, as above.

5. For Governorships, as above.

6. Then, only then, should we be thinking about Presidential and VP candidates for 2008.  Let's work on the next 2 years and then see who we have after 2006.

At least that is what I think.

How did Bush win when we had such a huge and successful GOTV campaign in central and eastern Iowa, where most of the votes are?  The Democrats made substantial gains in the state legislature, increasing the number of House Democrats, and we tied it up in the state Senate for the first time in many years.  But we lost the most important race this year, apparently because we ignored the reddest part of our state.

If you want to call TIAA-CREF and complain, their number is 1-800-842-2776.

Then there is this wave of defeat running through our diaries this morning because of what appears to me to be random static in the polls and the phony issue of Mary Cheney.  Get a grip, people!  Things are moving our way in Iowa, and elsewhere.  Quit whining and GOTV!

Bush 46%
Kerry 45%
Nader 2%
Undecided 7%

It's likely voters, perhaps explaining some of the discrepancies  with earlier competing polls.  A February Register poll had Kerry up by 7 points.  Other more recent polls show Kerry up slightly (2-4% in some).  A Strategic Vision survey released yesterday showed Kerry 48%/Bush 46% in Iowa: http://www.kcrg.com/article.aspx?art_id=86144&cat_id=123

Aside from the horserace numbers, the survey relaeased today seems consistent with earlier Iowa survey results and national polls, e.g., Bush's 47% approval/49% disapproval.  Also, Kerry has a 7 point lead with independents.  So, I am not overly concerned and I think Kerry should ultimately win here.  Still, I wish we had a comfortable lead.

As a forest biologist that teaches courses on forest health issues, I am not against logging forests, and I don't want logging banned as a management tool.  And I generally support the forest industry (though I think plantation forestry is a better, more environmentally sound supplier of timber).  But there is little scientific nor economic justification for opening roadless areas to logging.  It costs the government much more to put in the roads than they get from timber sales.

So what is the motivation here?

The Des Moines Register has a story on how the moderate Democratic Leadership Council (or at least Al From, its leader) likes Vilsack as the VP pick.  From does not clearly make an endorsement, but he says " . . .  I would be very, very excited if Tom Vilsack were the nominee.  I just don't think you find (sic) a more solid, more innovative, more forward-looking person."

Maybe solid, but innovative and forward-looking?  As a loyal Iowa Democrat, I don't think you could get a more lackluster and ineffective VP candidate, except perhaps Gephardt.  In my opinion, neither of these individuals on the ticket would help Kerry win Iowa, which will only vote Bush if most of the rest of the swing states vote Bush.  I am still for either Edwards or Clark, depending on how crucial an issue that national security appears to be.  Edwards does not get discussion in the article, apparently because the moderates are not interested in him.  Why not?

I am starting to get very worried that my Governor will be the VP nominee.  He is being thoroughly vetted, even going back to looking at insignificant letters Vilsack wrote as the mayor of a small Iowa town, called, believe it or not, Mount Pleasant.  Vilsack could just have well been the mayor in the movie Pleasantville, living his career in black and white.

It seems to me that the DLC got us into this mess, by screwing up Al Gore's campaign and then kowtowing to the Bush agenda.  Does Al From have Kerry's ear and a major influence on the VP selection?

"At the news conference, Bush turned curt when a French reporter asked him why his policies were "pushing your country and France to divorce," noting that former President John F. Kennedy had suggested that everyone has two countries - his own and France.

"To paraphrase President Kennedy, there's America and then there's Texas," Bush retorted. He did not elaborate. The purported Kennedy comment was actually originally uttered by President Thomas Jefferson.

Aides later said Bush was just trying to suggest there was another side to matters."

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040606/D8315TGG0.html

What an idiot!  And what an embarrassment.  Kinda like calling the Pope "Sir."  Who knows what he will say at the D-Day ceremonies.

"Out of 604 Iowans who regularly vote in state elections, 48 percent said they would vote for John Kerry in a race against President George W. Bush, while 43 percent said they would vote for Bush and 9 percent were undecided. With a 4 percent margin of error, the race between Bush and Kerry is a statistical dead heat."

"If Ralph Nader is included in the poll question, Kerry's lead narrows, with 46 percent of Iowans supporting Kerry, 42 percent support Bush and 3 percent are with Nader."