Of Missing Persons

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 355

John Edwards withdrew from the race for the Democratic presidential nomination today. In leaving the field to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Edwards joins Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, and Bill Richardson in the ranks of former candidates. All of these men, now gone from the race, nevertheless left an indelible imprint on its terms of debate: Joe Biden on foreign policy generally, and Iraq in particular; Chris Dodd on restoring civil liberties and the rule of law; John Edwards on poverty; Bill Richardson on diplomacy and the environment. Every one of them had the courage of their convictions, and, in spite of a mass media that continually focused on prematurely simplifying the campaign to a two-person horse race, made their impact nonetheless, oftentimes through the simple act of refusing to go quietly.

And the supporters of these departed candidates are now left to sift through their feelings, their policy priorities, their character judgments, and to pick whom to now support between two candidates not of their original choosing. It is an uncomfortable and difficult process. My own chosen candidate, Joe Biden, left the race nearly a month ago, and I am nowhere near settled on whom to eventually give my allegiance.

But in Iowa, we were the luckiest of voters, because no matter who we may have originally supported, as Iowans we had the luxury of working for, speaking for and voting for the person we viewed as the most qualified to lead this nation out of the dark night of the past seven years. We had the luxury of participation without compromise. No one else can claim that privilege. And that is a shame.

Readers of this blog will know that I was never a John Edwards supporter. I never felt that John Edwards possessed the ability to bring people together that will prove so crucial in healing our country and helping it move forward again. But when I think of the race without John Edwards, without the last member of the non-hundred million dollar club, I feel a bit sad. Because now there are only two voices left to speak.

Eventually, of course, we'll be down to one voice. And Democrats will rally behind our nominee with energy and commitment that will propel our candidate to an historic victory in November.

Just give us a minute.

Clinton, Obama Issue Statements on Edwards' Withdrawal

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 355

The campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama issued statements today regarding the decision of John Edwards to withdraw from the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Hillary Clinton

John Edwards ended his campaign today in the same way he started it - by standing with the people who are too often left behind and nearly always left out of our national debate.

John ran with compassion and conviction and lifted this campaign with his deep concern for the daily lives of the American people. That is what this election is about - it's about our people. And John is one of the greatest champions the American people could ask for.

I wish John and Elizabeth all the best. They have my great personal respect and gratitude. And I know they will continue to fight passionately for the country and the people they love so deeply.

Barack Obama

John Edwards has spent a lifetime fighting to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling, even when it wasn’t popular to do or covered in the news. At a time when our politics is too focused on who’s up and who’s down, he made a nation focus again on who matters – the New Orleans child without a home, the West Virginia miner without a job, the families who live in that other America that is not seen or heard or talked about by our leaders in Washington. John and Elizabeth Edwards have always believed deeply that we can change this – that two Americas can become one, and that our country can rally around this common purpose. So while his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America.

Edwards to Quit Race Today

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 355

The Associated Press is reporting this morning that John Edwards will quit the presidential race today after Saturday's electoral death-knell in his home state of South Carolina.

According to AP, Edwards will announce his withdrawal at an event in New Orleans at 1:00 PM EST today.

I'll be back with more thoughts after the announcement.

Web Stats: Bush Tanks There, Too

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 356

Following President Bush's last State of the Union address last night, the overwhelming bulk of post-speech commentary in the media (old and new) has been to the effect that everyone - Congress, the press, the vast majority of the American public - has already put this administration in the rear-view mirror and is focused on the question of who will be the next occupant of the oval office.

To be sure, I agree with this assessment, but I've also been curious to see if there would be any way to substantiate it. And so, being, y'know, me, I went hunting today for some numbers to back up or refute the conventional wisdom. And sure enough, the answer, like so many things these days, is to be found on Google.

I decided to punch in a trend search comparing search volumes for President Bush, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and just to provide a baseline for comparison, ultimate political botnet hit-bait Ron Paul. The search compared Google volumes over the past 30 days. The result: Bush comes in dead last. Dead last. Granted, the numbers available today run only through January 26, when Obama stormed to a landslide victory in the South Carolina, and so does not include data for the immediate aftermath of the State of the Union, traditionally an annual high-water mark of Presidential media coverage. But still. President Bush comes in last.

The picture below tells the story. The trend line legend is:
blue = Barack Obama
red = Hillary Clinton
goldenrod = John Edwards
violet = Ron Paul
green = George W. Bush



So, yes, based on these trends, the American people have clearly stopped paying attention to this president in favor of the next president, whomever that turns out to be.

I'll run another trend line in a few days time to track any changes between last Saturday and the last night's State of the Union. Watch this space!

New Edwards Ad in South Carolina: "Native Son"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 361

John Edwards has started airing a new ad in South Carolina. Titled "Native Son," the 90-second spot is a faux movie trailer, complete with an "In a world..." narrated beginning.

The fact that John Edwards feels the need, just two days before the South Carolina primary, to run an ad reintroducing himself to the state where he was born relieves me from any necessity of further comment.

Here's the script:

NARRATOR: In a world where candidates are many, one man stands apart from the crowd.

EDWARDS: When people say to me, 'why are you running for President of the United States,' I can say it in one sentence. I'm running for President of the United States because I want everyone in America to have the same chances that I've had.

NARRATOR: Born to humble beginnings in South Carolina, he spent his life fighting against the rich and powerful to help the kind regular people he grew up with.

SUPPORTER: Give 'em hell, Johnny.

EDWARDS: Oh, I will.

NARRATOR: Now we have the chance to let him bring that fight to the White House, to rescue a nation hijacked by special interests and deliver it back to the hands of the people.

EDWARDS: The strength of America's not just in the Oval Office, the strength of America is in this room, right now. It's the American people, the incredible capacity of the American people to do great things. And we need you. Your country needs you.

NARRATOR: From the people that want to end this senseless war, comes the story of the man who will bring you stronger schools, smart trade and universal health care. Starring South Carolina's native son, John Edwards. On January 26th, choose a brighter future – John Edwards for President.

EDWARDS: I'm John Edwards, and I approve this message.

And the video:

New Edwards Ad: "What Happened?"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 363

John Edwards is putting up a new TV ad in the run-up to the South Carolina primary. The 30-second spot, titled, "What Happened?," throws some bombs at Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, painting them as Washington sell-outs.

But, really, isn't anybody at the Edwards campaign paying attention to how ads like this play? "What Happened?" could easily be the tag line to John Edwards' entire disastrous month of January, and the tone of the ad comes across as more swan song than anything.

Anyway, here's the script of the ad:

Narrator: One gets more money than anyone from drug companies.
The other one takes more money than anyone from Washington lobbyists.
What's happened to the Democratic Party?
Whatever happened to the party of the people?
Good question.

The only one who's never taken a dime from PACs or Washington lobbyists
Who knows we've been ignored too long.
Who knows that rebuilding the middle class is more important than politics.
Our John Edwards.
The only one.

John Edwards: I'm John Edwards and I approve this message.

And here's the video:

Thoughts on New Hampshire

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 378

I finally got a chance last night to watch a recording of the ABC/WMUR/Facebook debate. Here are some quick thoughts, combined with general observations about the post-Iowa state of things.

Hillary Clinton

With a stinging third place finish for Hillary Clinton in Iowa still very fresh in the public mind, Saturday's debate presented Clinton with a unique opportunity to show a watching world what, if anything, she learned from the first electoral setback of her career. Unfortunately for Clinton, what the audience saw was a hunkered down candidate, gritting her teeth through what she too-evidently views as a mercifully abbreviated campaign in yet another pesky small state of negligible importance and counting the days until she can wage the sort of media-driven national campaign she would clearly be more comfortable running. She appeared neither relaxed, nor reevaluative, nor inclined in the slightest to do a single thing differently today than she was doing a week ago. Cranky and on defense, Clinton appeared more primed for an argument than prepped for a debate.

Which, I think, reflects the state of things within the Clinton campaign generally, and raises the question: did you guys have no Plan B? Did no one in the Clinton campaign ever once raise a hand and posit a couple of What Ifs: What If one day the sun did not rise in the East, What If the birds did not fly south for the winter, and What If Hillary Clinton actually lost in Iowa? As it is, Hillary Clinton and her campaign have responded to last Thursday's result with increasingly negative attacks/drawing sharp distinctions (take your pick) on Barack Obama, while simultaneously trying to outdo him at promoting "change" as a campaign mantra. Three words on Hillary Clinton: in deep trouble.

John Edwards

The quickest of scans through posts on this site tagged "John Edwards" will reveal that I am not his biggest fan. So sit down before you read this next part: I think John Edwards won the debate Saturday night. Edwards won not because of any brilliant answers, per se, although his "she didn't make these kinds of attacks when she was ahead" molotov at Hillary Clinton was hands-down the best line of the night. No, John Edwards won at St. Anselm because of what that debate revealed about his strategy coming out of Iowa.

Saturday night saw John Edwards punching away at his mainstay populist themes and steering pretty clear of directly hitting either Obama or Richardson, keeping himself focused on attacking a newly vulnerable Hillary Clinton. Politically, this is absolutely the right course of action for John Edwards on a number of levels.

Placing second in Iowa after four years of non-stop campaigning here was almost as bad for John Edwards as placing third was for Hillary Clinton. But with the race now indisputably a three-way contest between himself, Obama and Clinton (sorry, Governor Richardson), Edwards is clearly now focused on simply hanging in there through February 5 and beyond in the near-certain knowledge that either Obama or Clinton will drop out at some point, which then injects Edwards into the center of the two-person race he's been positioning himself for since at least the middle of last summer when he decided it was no more mister nice guy and went angry populist. John Edwards now doesn't have to win anything to achieve his central strategic goal for at least the next two months. All he has to do is stay competitive until one or the other of his principal opponents drops. That is brilliant strategic political thinking from John Edwards, which leaves me nearly as impressed as I am surprised.

Barack Obama

Saturday night was one of Barack Obama's more comfortable debate performances, I thought. He finally found his voice on health care, dealing effectively with Clinton's charge that his plan is "not universal," which will pay dividends for him as the campaign progresses. I also found fascinating the way in which Obama made tactical alliance with John Edwards in response to some of Clinton's points. That tactic makes Obama and Edwards seem collegial and of good will, while leaving Clinton looking isolated and shrill. There's not much that Clinton can do in response, save to cry foul for "piling on," which, you may recall, served her poorly in Iowa. But the next time you hear Hillary Clinton and her campaign complaining that Obama is getting a free ride in the media, know that this is part of what she's talking about.

Bill Richardson

Let's save lots of keystrokes for everyone right now and simply admit that Bill Richardson has won the Likability Primary coming out of Iowa. And then let's save further untold keystrokes by admitting that's the only primary he's likely to win this year.

Thoughts on the Des Moines Register Democratic Debate

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 403

The Des Moines Register debate among the Democratic candidates for president has just wrapped up. Here are some thoughts on each candidate, in alphabetical order.

Joe Biden - hampered by a cold, Biden nonetheless delivered a strong performance in this debate. All the candidates recognize the importance of Iowa in the 2008 campaign process, but more than any of the others, Joe Biden was able to speak to Iowan's specific issues and concerns directly and effectively, but without overt pandering. Two examples: speaking about the contrast between his first trip to Iowa in 1974 and the present, Biden observed that there is now "so much open land and so few farmers," due to the rise of agribusiness at the expense of family farms, and he gave a terrific response on alternative energy and biofuels, giving an answer that referred to both cellulosic and corn-based ethanol and the comparative long term potential of each that will have the other candidates scrambling back to their playbooks to emulate. Look for that to pay dividends for Biden in the final sprint to January 3rd. But undoubtedly the best moment of this debate for Joe Biden, or any of the other candidates, for that matter, was his statement on civil rights, which drew applause from not only the audience, but the other candidates on the stage. Biden carried the entire hall, and the debate with it, in that moment.

Hillary Clinton: In a debate focused on issues and substance, Hillary Clinton came in with a game plan focused on selling her personal qualities to voters, rather than her policies. She strove - visibly strove - to appear relaxed, unflappable, strong, and confident in her inevitable success in this campaign. I'm not so sure this was the best strategy for this particular debate. The idea that this race is for all practical purposes over a full 3 weeks before caucus night is beginning to ware on Iowans. Clinton may have done better to engage on issues, rather than portraying herself as the One to Beat.

Chris Dodd: Dodd is always at his best when talking about the rule of law and restoring the Constitution, and today was no exception. Dodd also scored well in a gutsy pitch for a corporate carbon tax instead of a cap and trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But there wasn't a home run for Chris Dodd today, and that is what he needs absolutely every single time he goes to bat between now and January 3rd. Even then, it may already be too late for Dodd to improve his chances at a respectable showing in the caucuses, and that would be a shame for a candidate who has run a solid, ideas-based campaign.

John Edwards: Today was a missed opportunity for John Edwards. Edwards had a chance to come in to this debate and remind Iowans why it was they catapulted him to national prominence with a second place finish here four years ago. Rather than do that, however, John Edwards treaded water with answers that did little more than rerun lines from his stump speeches. Edwards didn't gain any ground today, which, with the polls showing him in a no-margin-for error dead heat with Clinton and Obama, is as much as to say that he lost ground.

Barack Obama: Today was easily Barack Obama's best debate so far. At a pivotal moment in the campaign, his statement repeating his "fierce urgency of now" case for his candidacy and his description of his plans for his first year in office showed a combination of heart and head that put Barack Obama in his best light. The trick for Obama now is that he must clearly display this combination again and again between now and caucus night to pull supporters away from the other established front runners. Obama's off-the-cuff remark about looking forward to receiving Hillary Clinton's advice when he is president was also 100% pitch perfect. It's hard to imagine Barack Obama performing any better than he did at this debate.

Bill Richardson: Amiable, unpretentious in spite of his accomplishments, and likeable, Bill Richardson nonetheless came into this debate an undeniably deflated candidate. Once showing potential to actually crack into the polling territory inhabited by Clinton, Edwards and Obama, Richardson appears to have peaked in mid summer and has been steadily losing ground ever since. Lacking energy, let alone any memorable lines, and seemingly unable to close the sale with Iowa voters, Bill Richardson did nothing to halt his slide in today's debate. You can practically hear the air seeping out of his candidacy.

New ARG Iowa Poll: Richardson Dropping Like a Stone

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 416

American Research Group is out with a new Iowa poll this morning that vividly illustrates how fluid the Democratic nomination race in Iowa is now that we're heading into the home stretch.

Of particular interest are the numbers for Bill Richardson. In the previous ARG Iowa survey, conducted November 10-14, Richardson was at 12%; in this latest poll, conducted between November 26-29, Richardson now has the support of just 4% of "Likely Democratic Caucus Goers." No, this is not a typo: Richardson's actual poll result is 4%. If accurate, this poll shows a dramatic collapse of Richardson's backing, with two out of three of the New Mexico Governor's supporters deserting him for other candidates.

Predictably, much of Richardson's lost support has accreted to the top tier, judging by the fact that Obama's support jumped 6 points and Edwards increased by 3 points. But the other surprise in these numbers is Joe Biden increasing from 5% to 8%, his first significant move in months. This is what every candidate prays for going into the climactic phase of the campaign in Iowa: a late surge. If Biden can hold these gains, and then build his numbers into double digits, he stands a serious chance of dramatically exceeding expectations on caucus night.

Overall results:

Nov 10-14 Nov 26-29
Biden 5% 8%
Clinton 27% 25%
Dodd 3% 3%
Edwards 20% 23%
Gravel - -
Kucinich 2% 2%
Obama 21% 27%
Richardson 12% 4%
Undecided 10% 8%

Other highlights:

* 33% of likely caucus participants are undecided (8%) or say that they could switch candidates between now and January 3 (25%).
* 80% of those saying they support Clinton say their support is definite.
* 57% of those saying they support Edwards say their support is definite.
* 75% of those saying they support Obama say their support is definite.
* Among men, Clinton is at 22%, Edwards 22%, and Obama 30%.
* Among women, Clinton is at 28%, Edwards 24%, and Obama 25%.

The soft support number shown for John Edwards is further bad news for his campaign, with 43% of his supporters indicating that they may still end up supporting someone else; this is worrying news for Edwards, even with the 3% gain noted above. Look for John Edwards to continue to weaken over the next few weeks.

Some facts about the poll's methodology:

Sample Size: 600 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of likely Democratic caucus goers living in Iowa (536 Democrats and 64 no party (independent) voters).

Sample Dates: November 26-29, 2007

Margin of Error: ± 4 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split.

Incidence of Likely Democratic Caucus Participation: 10.5% of Democratic and no party voters.

Question Wording:

If the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus were being held today between (names rotated) Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson, for whom would you vote?

Would you say that you definitely plan to participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus, that you might participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus, or that you will probably not participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus?

Chasing Access

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 416

Today's Washington Post carries an interesting article on the trials and tribulations of reporters trying to penetrate the de-facto bubble of candidates' unbelievably demanding schedules and actually speak with those whom they seek to cover. The article focused on Hillary Clinton in particular, but noted the same issue, if to a lesser degree, also arises with Obama and Edwards.

I've been running around Iowa tailing candidates since January of this year, and know from experience that it has never been an easy matter to get face time with a candidate as a blogger, so the fact that the main stream media encounters the same problem doesn't surprise me. The plain fact is that candidates are on a mission to get their message out every single day, and, if the campaign doesn't see a way to make use of the access you're requesting to help them get their message of the moment out to voters, then they don't have time for you. This is sometimes especially true if you're [only] a local blogger.

Fortunately, as [only] a local blogger, I also have the luxury of setting that role aside at will, and showing up at candidate events as someone far more important: an actual voter. In this regard, I almost always have better luck in getting face time with the candidates. So I can attest to the fact that when campaigns push aside requests for access from the media so their candidate can spend time talking with voters, that is, while undeniably convenient for the campaigns, nonetheless very often true.

Granted, I often run right home and blog about what the candidates and I talk about on those occasions. I'm sure that some members of the mainstream media would call 'foul' on that, but there's no point in being a blogger - or a voter, for that matter - if it's the same as being reporter.

In an ideal world, everyone would be spoiled to the same extent that voters (and sometimes, even bloggers) in Iowa and New Hampshire are when it comes to up close and personal interaction with people who want to be our next president. And, setting Iowa voter smugness aside for a moment, I truly wish that were so. But, as the Post's article dramatizes, this is far from an ideal world. So, to the mainstream media frustrated by the often large gap between what they want from the campaigns versus what the campaigns are willing to give, all I can say is: welcome to the club, guys; we've got jackets.

New Edwards Ad: "Mess"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 420

John Edwards has put up a new ad in Iowa. The 30 second spot, titled "Mess," addresses the obligation to leave a better America to our children. Here's the script:

What we want to make certain is true is that our children have a better life than we've had. Twenty generations of Americans before us have ensured that that was true.

And if we want to do that, we're going to have to be willing to take on this corrupt system and change it. And if we're not going to do it, we're going to have to be willing to look our children in the eye and say we're going to leave this mess for you.

This is the great moral test of our generation, and we will meet that test.

I'm John Edwards and I approve this message.

Here's the video:

Thanksgiving Messages from the Candidates

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 425

For those giving thanks that there are still (or only!) 42 days left before the caucuses, and that New Hampshire has finally settled on a date for its primary, the candidates evidently want to make sure that you know you - and your vote - are not forgotten just because today's a holiday. In that spirit, here are Thanksgiving messages from the Democratic field.

Joe Biden

Have a Safe and Happy Thanksgiving

This Thanksgiving, the Bidens are celebrating a little bit differently than usual. My family and I will be in Des Moines celebrating our favorite American holiday. We're still grateful for the same things -- the health of our loved ones, the blessings of liberty. But this year we are keeping faith with our mission to spread our campaign gospel all across the Hawkeye state.

The spirit of Thanksgiving rests in our recognizing the blessings in our lives, and as we all take stock, I hope you will join me in expressing sincerest thanks to our soldiers serving in harm's way in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. May God bless you on this day of thanks, and may God protect our troops.

Joe Biden

Hillary Clinton

I hope that you and your family have a wonderful Thanksgiving. I love this holiday, and celebrating together with family and friends.
Thanksgiving is also a time to think of those in need. Every year I am inspired by the outpouring of generosity from all over the country.http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif I hope that this year you'll share in that tradition, whether you volunteer your time or make a donation to help others.
At our campaign offices in California, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina as well as our headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, we're accepting donations of nonperishable food to help local efforts to fight hunger. If you're not near one of our offices in those states and would still like to give back this Thanksgiving, here are a few national organizations with information about how you can help.
America's Second Harvest
1 800 Volunteer
End Hunger Network
Hunger Free America
This year, I'm so thankful to have you with me working for change. From my family to yours, have a very happy Thanksgiving.

Chris Dodd

DES MOINES – In the spirit of Thanksgiving, Presidential Candidate Chris Dodd, his family, and his staff today expressed heartfelt gratitude for the hospitality and support they have received across the state of Iowa. Dodd and his family, who recently relocated to Des Moines, are spending Thanksgiving Day with a family in Monticello.

Dodd issued the following statement of thanks:

“As families gather across the state of Iowa and the country on this Thanksgiving Day, I take a moment to remember how much I have to be grateful for. I want to express my sincere thanks for the following, all of which have made my experience in the Hawkeye State deeply enriching and inspiring:

My wife, Jackie, my two daughters, Grace and Christina, and my numerous other family members and friends who have offered their support every step of the way.

The people of Iowa, who have so graciously welcomed Jackie, the girls and me into their neighborhoods, homes, and schools so that we can be together.

The young servicemen and women from Iowa and across the nation, who sacrifice so much in order for us to gather safety and soundly in our homes on days like today.

The fire fighters and first responders in Iowa and elsewhere, who each and every day risk their lives for others.

Iowa's strong and dedicated Democrats, who are making a difference in this state from the local level all the way up to the State House and the Governor's Office.

The caucus process, for representing democracy at its very core, and for going above the power of money and celebrity in order to let each candidate be heard.

Our county chairs across Iowa who have worked tirelessly to reach out to caucus-goers, and share my passion for getting our country back on track.

The simple pleasures of life - coffee at the Ritual Café in Des Moines, the scenic beauty of Decorah in the fall and the Loess Hills at sunset, the stacked shelves at Prairie Lights bookstore in Iowa City, and the loose meat sandwiches at the Canteen in Ottumwa.”

John Edwards

At this time of year, it is very important that we take a moment and give thanks for all we have and all that is around us.

We are grateful to be spending this Thanksgiving with our family. We set aside this day to give thanks for all of our blessings - and for the time we have together. We are grateful for our family, our friends and to live in this great country.

Over the past few years, we have been blessed to have built friendships with so many wonderful Iowans. We wish you and your family a joyful Thanksgiving and hope you have the opportunity to treasure this day with those you love.

With warmest holiday wishes,

-John and Elizabeth Edwards

Barack Obama

"On this Thanksgiving, as we spend time with our family and friends, let's all reflect on what we're thankful for in our own lives. And let's remember those who cannot be with their loved ones because they're serving overseas. But let's also do our part to help those who have no place to go for a meal. Amid reports that more and more Americans are visiting food pantries at a time when those same pantries are less and less able to help them, I will be volunteering this week at the New Horizons food pantry in Manchester, New Hampshire. And I encourage all Americans to do what they can to help those in need -- because the best way to show our gratitude for what we have is by doing our part for those who have less."

Bill Richardson

"As we gather with our families this holiday, let us remember the troops serving abroad who cannot be with theirs. The military men and women risking their lives in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere around the world reflect the best that America has to offer. We are all truly grateful for their courageous service."

"And as we gather in our homes, let us remember also our veterans here who have no home to go to. One in four homeless on our streets is a veteran, and tragically, a wave of homeless vets from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are expected in the coming years. We must act now to stop this. We must give these men and women the care, support, and respect that they have earned and deserve. We must do better by them."

And finally, from me, here's wishing you a day of thanks filled with the love of your family, friends, and neighbors. And, while you're on line, you might want to visit The Hunger Site, where a click of the mouse turns into a free donation of food for those in need.

Enjoy every bit of today.

New Edwards Ad in Iowa: "Health Care"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 433

John Edwards has put up a second ad in Iowa. The 30 second spot, titled "Health Care," runs as follows:

“When I’m president I’m going to say to members of Congress and members of my administration, including my cabinet: I’m glad that you have health care coverage and your family has health care coverage. But if you don’t pass universal health care by July of 2009 – in six months – I’m going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you. [Applause] There’s no excuse for politicians in Washington having health care when you don’t have health care. I’m John Edwards and I approve this message.”

The rhetoric and tone of the ad are vintage John Edwards. But I have questions. For instance, where the ad states "I’m going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you," what does that mean, exactly? What powers, specifically? A press release issued by the Edwards campaign today says, in part, "On the first day of Edwards’ administration, he will submit legislation that ends health care coverage for the president, all members of Congress, and all senior political appointees in the legislative and executive branches of government on July 20th, 2009 -- unless Congress has enacted universal health care reform.[emphasis added]" If John Edwards is planning to make good on his threat to end health care coverage for Congress by introducing legislation, isn't he forgetting that legislation is passed by Congress? I mean, Edwards does know that, doesn't he? Does John Edwards really expect the Legislative Branch, the castigation of which has become his main campaign theme, to suddenly change from the hopelessly corrupt institution he's been saying it is, and pass legislation that eliminates health care coverage for its own members? The bill would be dead on arrival, and its introduction would do nothing but irreparably poison from the outset Edwards' chances of achieving anything with Congress. Including, of course, universal health care.

If not legislation, what then? Executive order? Not likely. Presidents don't get to rule by fiat, no matter what George W. Bush and Dick Cheney would have us believe. Any attempt by the Executive Branch to eliminate health care for the Legislative Branch with a stroke of the presidential pen would face immediate challenge in the courts as a violation of Constitutional separation of powers. The likelihood of the order being upheld in the courts is remote, at best.

So what is John Edwards getting at here? If the answer is that John Edwards is the voice of the common American in this election, and this latest ad continues that strategy, then is it likely that this will win him any votes he doesn't already have? If it does, and this strategy ultimately delivers the White House to John Edwards, what will become of his ability to govern once he has tried, and likely failed, to achieve his objectives through unilateral application of presidential power?

Like so much about John Edwards, this latest salvo over health care, and the ad promoting it, just doesn't stand up to examination. The tragedy of John Edwards in this campaign cycle is that the approach he advocates to achieve the change that so many good people cry out for is so inherently flawed that it simply cannot succeed. Those who look to Edwards to deliver on his rhetoric will be sorely disappointed in the lack of results, leading to further disaffection of citizens from their government and the perpetuation of the apathy that is killing our democracy.

Change, in so many areas, simply must be achieved in this country. And sincerity, dedication, good intentions and even fiery rhetoric will all be necessary to make it happen. But they will not be enough, in themselves, to finally deliver results. That will require statecraft, and it will demand compromise. Ultimately, it will depend on the ability of the President of the United States to persuade people of all political viewpoints of the rightness of his/her cause, rather than merely exacting pain in consequence of defiance. Increasingly, John Edwards is demonstrating that he does not possess, or cares not to use, that ability. Whatever gifts and assets John Edwards may possess as a candidate, the fact that he no longer even feigns interest in the essential work of bringing people together to produce results for the American people makes him a very poor choice for our next president.

Candidate Reactions to CHIP Override Vote

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 460

Joe Biden: “I am deeply disappointed first that the President chose to veto this crucial legislation and second, that the House failed to override his veto. Every single child in this country should have health insurance. Instead of making progress toward this goal, the President and Republicans in the House are turning their backs on 9 million children.”

“Despite this blow, I am committed to continue working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle until our kids have the health coverage they need and deserve.”

Hillary Clinton: “It is deeply disappointing that a small minority of Republicans in Congress have put loyalty to this president ahead of healthcare for millions of children. But we will not give up until a bill becomes law. I will keep fighting to enact a bipartisan bill that provides affordable coverage to America’s children.”

Chris Dodd: “Today's vote in the House to uphold the President's shameful veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is yet another reminder of the consequences of disastrous priorities on the part of this White House. With the resources it takes to execute just over three months of the Iraq War, we could fully fund the expansion of health care for needy children that Bush vetoed."

John Edwards: "Today is another sad example of how broken Washington is. Instead of standing up for children and health care, House Republicans have decided to stand up for special interests and lobbyists. From this day forward, House Republicans are on notice. When I am the Democratic nominee, the days of Republican members who voted against children's health care will be numbered. We are taking names and, together, as one party, we will campaign against them."

"Sadly, there is strong message here for Democrats and Republicans. We should never have to consider selling out to lobbyists when it comes to the health of our kids. If universal health care is ever going to be more than a dream, we need to do more than change the president. We need to elect strong Democratic majorities in the House and Senate with the backbone to stand up to the big insurance and drug companies that are going to do everything they can to block universal health care. We need a strong ticket from top to bottom that will compete and win everywhere in America.

"And, when I am the Democratic nominee, we will not only win the White House, we will make every Republican who stands against children's health care pay the price."

Barack Obama: "Four million American children were denied basic health coverage today because Washington politicians failed to stand up to this President’s disgraceful veto. At a time when we’re spending billions of dollars on a war that never should’ve been authorized and giving billions in tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, Washington’s failure shows a callousness of priorities that is offensive to the ideals we hold as Americans.

When I am President, I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term that will cover every American and cut costs more dramatically than any other plan offered by a candidate in this race. And I’ll do it by bringing Republicans and Democrats together, like I did when I expanded health care for an additional 150,000 children and their parents as an Illinois state Senator."

Bill Richardson: "By siding with the President on this failed override vote, 154 Republican members of Congress chose to protect President Bush's misguided view, rather than protect the health of 10 million children nationwide. This President needs to stop playing politics with the lives and health of 20,000 New Mexico children and start supporting this bipartisan legislation, which is the highest health care priority for Governors across the country."

How Many More Victories Can John Edwards Survive?

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 462

I sat in on a conference call hosted by the John Edwards campaign yesterday. The purpose of the call was to trumpet Edwards' winning the endorsement of the Iowa chapter of the SEIU, comprised of about 2,000 members statewide. Among the participants were national campaign manager and former congressman David Bonior, communications director Chris Kofinis, Iowa state director Jennifer O'Malley-Dillon, and other senior staff.

After detailed expository remarks about the importance of gaining the endorsement of the SEIU's Iowa chapter, and hinting at additional endorsements to follow later in the day (indeed, nine more SEIU state chapters followed the Iowa chapter's lead in endorsing Edwards before the day was out), the Edwards staff threw the call open to Q&A. The most pointed question, asked in slightly different forms by several members of the media, was how much effect the Iowa endorsement had in assuaging the campaign's disappointment at not winning the endorsement of the SEIU national council. David Bonior in particular was quick to try to deflect that question away from the Edwards campaign, and towards the Clinton and Obama campaigns, stressing how hard the others tried to first win the national SEIU endorsement, and then tried to block the Edwards campaign from gaining the Iowa endorsement. Without putting it in so many words, Bonior went so far as to assert that not winning the SEIU national endorsement was in fact a victory for the Edwards campaign, since no other campaign won it, either.

No one with even a vague understanding of the Iowa caucuses, or Democratic politics in general, would discount the importance of union support. Indeed, the endorsement of The International Association of Fire Fighters is probably the decisive factor allowing Chris Dodd to stay in the race until caucus night. And as Bonior and the other Edwards staffers pointed out during yesterday's conference call, political organizers dispatched by unions are among the best in the business, and can provide a significant boost to a candidate's ground game. And the nine other SEIU state chapters joining the Iowa chapter in endorsing John Edwards yesterday have a combined membership of some 930,000, a big number in anybody's book.

So, yes, all of those things are true. And still none of them can erase the central and overriding fact that John Edwards' not winning the SEIU national endorsement is, quite simply, not winning. It is losing. There is no victory in getting 10 state SEIU chapters to support you when you have spent more than three years working to win the combined support of all 50 state chapters in the form of a national endorsement; far from it. It is a defeat of the first magnitude.

Similarly, Edwards' announcement late last month that he is opting in to public financing of his campaign, and thereby accepting the spending limits that are a condition of receiving federal matching dollars, was not, as he told CNN, "taking a stand, a principled stand, and I believe in public financing." This belief would seem to have come to Edwards late in a year when he has been working as hard as anyone to raise campaign cash, and just happened to precede by a few days definitive confirmation that his fundraising numbers have dropped alarmingly from earlier quarters. A victory for principle, or a triumph of spin?

So it is that the Iowa SEIU "victory" extends John Edwards' summer slump into the autumn, and, as much as anything, serves to highlight the extent to which the Edwards campaign continues to fall short of achieving every single one of its major goals. One has to wonder how many more such victories his campaign can survive.

Reactions to President Bush's CHIP Veto

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 475

Candidate Reactions

Joe Biden

With one stroke of his pen, President Bush has denied health insurance to 3.8 million kids who were due to get it under this bipartisan expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program. He’s willing to spend billions and billions of dollars in Iraq, but he’s not willing to invest in our kids’ healthcare. It is unconscionable and wrong. Every child in this country should have health insurance. The President’s veto is a tragedy for the millions who don’t.

Hillary Clinton

With the stroke of a pen, President Bush has robbed 10,500 uninsured Iowa children of the chance for a healthy start in life and the health coverage they need but can't afford. These children are invisible to this president, but they aren't invisible to the American people or to the overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress – and they aren't invisible to me. I was proud to help create the Children's Health Insurance Program during the Clinton Administration, which today provides health insurance for six million children.

Chris Dodd

This President's priorities are unconscionable. With the resources it takes to execute just over 3 months of the Iraq War, we could fully fund the expansion of health care for needy children that Bush vetoed. Indeed, today's veto is another reminder that this war is not only adversely affecting our security but also adversely affecting our other top priorities, and it's time for Congress to do what it must do to end it.

John Edwards

Today, we have witnessed a President that has turned his back on health care for children. Not surprisingly, in George Bush's administration, corporate cronies and insurance industry allies always come first, while children's health care comes last. In an America where nearly 9 million children don't have health coverage, Congress must do what is right and fight for these children and override Bush's cruel veto.

Even more shocking is that Republican Presidential candidates, including Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney are all lining up with President Bush and against health care for our children. Instead of threatening the health care of children, it's time for Bush, and Republicans like McCain, Giuliani, and Romney to start picking on someone their own size

Barack Obama

It is outrageous that the President has decided to use his fourth veto to deny health care to four million American children. At a time when we’re spending billions of dollars on a war that should never have been authorized and giving billions in tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, today’s veto of this bipartisan plan shows a callousness of priorities that is offensive to the ideals we hold as Americans. But George Bush doesn’t have the last word, and I will keep fighting for the Republican votes needed to override his veto.

As the wealthiest nation on earth, there is no reason we shouldn’t be able to cover every child. As President, I’ll sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term that will cover every American, and cut costs more dramatically than any other plan offered by a candidate in this race. And I’ll do it by bringing Republicans and Democrats together – like I did when I was in the Illinois state Senate, when I helped expand health care for an additional 150,000 children and their parents.

If there’s one thing all of us should be able to agree on, no matter what our political views, it’s that our children should get the treatment they need when they need it. And when I’m president, they will.

Bill Richardson

The Grinch came three months early this year and stole children's health care. Unfortunately, this is no fairy tale, and unless Congress overrides the President's veto, it will not have a happy ending.

President Bush's veto is irresponsible. It is outrageous. It is simply immoral. Of the many shifting rationales the President has offered for vetoing this bill, one is that it will burden private insurance companies. That sums up everything we need to know about this President. Choosing between insurance companies and children should not be hard.

This bill is morally and fiscally responsible. It pays for itself with a cigarette tax right now. It will save us money over the long run by getting poor children the treatment they need when they need it, rather than forcing them into overstrained, costly emergency rooms.

I strongly urge Congress to do the right thing and override the President's veto.

Other Reactions

Tom Harkin

Just two short days after the President declared October 1st Child Health Day and recognized the important role CHIP has played in helping poor children stay healthy, he has decided to turn his back on the health of millions of American kids. The CHIP bill has the overwhelming support of Democrats and Republicans, nurses, doctors, teachers and health insurance companies, for one reason – because it works. Once again, President Bush’s rhetoric fails to match his actions, and this time it is at the expense of children across the nation. I pledge to work with my colleagues in the Senate to continue fighting for working families by overturning this veto.

Ted Kennedy

President Bush and I have one thing in common.

When either of us wants to see a doctor, American taxpayers cover 72% of our health care premiums. And when it comes time to pick a medical facility, either of us can go to a government-run hospital like the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.

President Bush just vetoed a bill extending and reforming the State Children's Health Insurance Program. So I want to know:

If government-run health care is good enough for me, and is good enough for President Bush, why isn't it good enough for America's children?

Earlier this week, I stood outside the White House with working families to ask that very question -- and we've got it on video. Watch it, and join our effort:

http://www.democraticmajority.org/schip

President Bush says that SCHIP will cost too much.

But for the price of one day in Iraq, we could cover 256,000 children. One week would cover 1.8 million children. And just over one month of the Iraq war would cover the full cost of the bill, insuring more than 10 million children for a whole year.

This is a question of priorities -- and President Bush's priorities obviously don't include the needs of America's children.

There has to be a better way. Health insurance shouldn't be a luxury for the privileged few. It should be a right for all Americans -- especially our children.

As part of Monday's rally, a group of children pulling little red wagons was at the gates of the White House to urge the President to sign the bill. Please watch my video from the rally, and show your support for SCHIP:

http://www.democraticmajority.org/schip

When my son lost his leg to cancer as a child, my family didn't have to worry about getting him the best possible care. But in the hospital waiting rooms, we saw family after family -- middle class families -- driven into poverty because of their children's medical bills.

So I ask President Bush and the Members of Congress who support his veto:

Would you deny your own family what you'll be denying millions of other families if this bill is vetoed?

If you don't believe the federal government should support children's health care, how can you in good conscience accept it for your own families?

We can be a voice for the nation's children -- a voice that every member of Congress needs to hear. If government-supported health care is good enough for Congress, it's good enough for America's children. Show your support for SCHIP today:

http://www.democraticmajority.org/schip

Finally, Moveon is organizing a protest rally against the veto tomorrow in downtown Des Moines.
Where: In front of the federal building downtown
210 Walnut Street
Des Moines, Iowa, 50309
When: Thursday, Oct 4 2007, 5:00 PM

View Larger Map
Click here to RSVP:
http://pol.moveon.org/event/events/event.html?event_id=40945&&id=11324-8047930-rVe8.X&t=3

Odds & Ends

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 489

Just a couple of paper bullets from the brain while I'm thinking of them.

1: You Know You're the Front Runner When...

As everybody knows by now, Hillary Clinton put out the final piece of her health care plan here in Des Moines yesterday. No sooner had the words, 'health care' left Senator Clinton's mouth than the reactions from the rest of the Democratic field began to pile up in my in box:

Chris Dodd had this to say:

"While she talks about the political scars she bears, the personal scars borne by the American people are far greater. The mismanagement of the effort in 1993 and 1994 has set back our ability to move toward universal health care immeasurably.

"We've known what the problems have been for nearly 15 years, and what the solutions could be. What's been missing is leadership that knows how to bring people together and get the job done.

"To ensure all Americans have affordable health care will take more than leadership that simply knows how to fight - it will take leadership that knows how to bring people together and win."

Here is part of John Edwards' lengthy statement:

"I'm glad that, today, the architect of the 1993 plan has another care proposal - and if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then I'm flattered.

"But unless Senator Clinton's willing to acknowledge the truth about our broken government and the cost of health care reform, I'm afraid flattery will get us nowhere.

"The lesson Senator Clinton seems to have learned from her experience with health care is, 'If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.'"

Barack Obama chimed in with:

"I commend Senator Clinton for her health care proposal. It's similar to the one I put forth last spring, though my universal health care plan would go further in reducing the punishing cost of health care than any other proposal that's been offered in this campaign. But the real key to passing any health care reform is the ability to bring people together in an open, transparent process that builds a broad consensus for change. That's how I was able to pass health care reform in Illinois that covered an additional 150,000 children and their parents, and that's how we'll prevent the drug and insurance industry from defeating our reform efforts like they did in 1994."

Bill Richardson's statement was in a similar vein:

"Health care affects the people of this country more directly than any other issue in this campaign, and I am pleased that Senator Clinton finally has joined the debate," Governor Richardson said. "I also am proud to see that she supports most of the initiatives I have outlined in my comprehensive proposal."

You've gotta love being Hillary Clinton - in statements regarding the same speech, she's snarkily "welcomed" to the health care debate, praised by her opponants for mirroring their own proposals, and castigated by them for her record on the issue.

And that's how you know you're the front runner.


2: Habeas Corpus

Of more urgent note this week, the Senate is due to vote on a measure to restore Habeas Corpus tomorrow. Habeas Corpus is the simple, basic right for anyone accused of a crime to appear before an impartial court and demand their accusers produce compelling evidence to back up the charges made against them. It is a cornerstone of liberty, and was severely weakened just before last November's elections with the passage of the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

A bill to restore the right of habeas corpus by repealing parts of the Military Commissions Act is now pending in the Senate. Predictably, Republican senators opposed to this bill are threatening a filibuster to prevent what they are otherwise fond of referring to as a "straight up or down vote" that would likely see the bill pass.

In the decisive final hours before the scheduled vote in the Senate, Chris Dodd is spearheading a drive for public pressure on senators who either oppose the bill or have not yet stated their support. If you care at all about civil liberties, or America's moral standing in the world, or upholding human rights in places like Guantanamo, or just want to take back part of your birthright as an American, you should take a moment right now to click over to the Restore Habeas Corpus site and find out how you can help.

A relentless devotion to the Constitution, as evidenced once again by this latest initiative, is the principal thing that makes Chris Dodd worth listening to in a field crowded with better-known candidates. He's got my wholehearted support on this bill.


3: Apparently, There Are Twenty "Top" Iowa Caucus Counties. Do You Live in One of Them?

And finally, tonight, more from Chris Dodd, though, unlike the preceding item, not one for the highlight reel. The Dodd campaign issued a news release this afternoon trumpeting "the announcement of County Chairs for the state’s top twenty Democratic caucus counties."

And which Iowa counties made the cut of the top twenty? Glad you asked! In the order listed by he Dodd campaign, they are: Polk, Linn, Scott, Johnson, Blackhawk, Dubuque, Story, Woodbury, Pottawattamie, Clinton, Cerro Gordo, Des Moines, Dallas, Warren, Lee, Muscatine, Marshall, Webster, Wapello and Marion.

So, if you're in one of the 79 Iowa counties not listed, you'll just have to try harder. Also, no mention in the release of whether counties further down the list of twenty would be able to move up in the rankings. But if supporters in, say, Marshall were to bundle together a few tidy contributions for the campaign, I dare say the sky's the limit.

This could open an entire second front in the Leapfrog Wars.

"Yeah, It's That Important"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 491

Just a quick note to say I was at the 30th Annual Tom Harkin Steak Fry today. What can I say, but that the folks in Indianola really know how to grill up a steak.

I'll be putting up posts about the goings on over the next day or two; not play-by-play stuff (check out Iowa Independent for Chase and John's coverage), but more like color commentary.

So, was there red meat from the podium? Did the air go out of anyone's balloon today? Did the candidates serve it up bloody or well done? And did anyone figure out what drew all those flies to the press file shed? Check back tomorrow for the answers to those questions and more!

President Bush's Iraq Visit

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 503

Of the major Democratic presidential candidates, only Joe Biden and John Edwards have issued reactions to Presiddent Bush's visit to Iraq yesterday. They're both worth a read, and Biden's in particular, as it concisely outlines his Iraq proposals, which I think are the strongest of any candidate's.

Joe Biden

Yesterday we learned that President Bush went to Iraq to survey the situation on the ground first hand. This is good news. The President needs to see what the rest of us have seen and know. While his plan for a surge in Iraq has had limited and temporary military success, it has not brought about the kind of political reconciliation the President and his Cabinet had hoped for.


It is my sincere hope that the President went to Iraq, not with an outcome in mind, but with his eyes open looking to learn the facts on the ground. And the facts are: there is no chance that Iraq can be governed by a strong central government no matter how many troops we have there.

We'll be hearing a lot about the "surge" over the next several weeks, but we all must remember its original purpose: to buy time for the central government in Iraq to get its act together and win the trust of all Iraqis.

That will not happen.

Absent an occupation which we cannot sustain or the return of a dictator which we cannot support, Iraq cannot be governed from the center at this point in its history.

There is no trust within the government, no trust of the government by the people, no capacity by the government to deliver security and services, and no prospect it will build that trust and capacity any time soon.

I've been making that case for over a year. And so have more and more experts, in and out of government.

Back in November, CIA director Michael Hayden made this very point in a private meeting with the Iraq Study Group. He said "the inability of the [central] government to govern is irreversible." There is no "milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around," he said. "We have spent a lot of energy and treasure creating a government... that cannot function."

Two weeks ago, our entire intelligence community came to the same conclusion. The National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq found that "Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively" and predicted that "the Iraqi government will become more precarious over the next six to twelve months."

As everyone knows, I have offered a plan (PlanForIraq.com) that contains the possibility, not the guarantee, of promoting stability in Iraq as we leave. It's based on the reality that Iraq cannot be governed from the center.

Instead, we have to give its warring factions breathing room in their own regions, with control over the fabric of their daily lives - police, education, jobs, marriage, and religion.

A limited central government would be in charge of truly common concerns, including protecting Iraq's borders and distributing oil revenues.

The good news is: the federal system at the heart of my plan is already in Iraq's constitution and in its laws.

We should refocus our efforts on making federalism work for all Iraqis. It is past time to make Iraq the world's problem, not just our own.

John Edwards

"The situation in Iraq is too serious for any more ‘Mission Accomplished’ photo ops. It's good that the violence is down in Anbar Province, but it's a homogeneous area that lacks the ethnic conflict that's plaguing the rest of the country. Iraq needs a comprehensive political solution and our brave troops deserve better than more of the president's rhetoric that clings to a failed strategy.

"Sadly, now more than ever, we know this president will stop at nothing to keep his failed Iraq strategy going. As we recently learned, the president is so confident Congress won’t stand up to him in this fall’s funding decisions that he’s actually going to increase his request to fund the surge by another $50 billion—on top of the original $147 billion supplemental he requested.

“This week, when Congress returns, they will have to confront President Bush's failed Iraq strategy head on. Enough is enough.

"When Congress comes back, they should stand firm: No timeline, no funding. No excuses."

Edwards Plans Iowa Bus Tour

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 539

After pedaling through part of the state during last week's RAGBRAI, John Edwards is trading in his bike for a bus and planning a 30-county campaign swing, to take place August 13 - 19.

Starting and ending in Des Moines, Edwards' bus tour will be making the following stops:

MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 2007
Des Moines
Perry
Jefferson
Carroll
Denison
Onawa

TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2007
Sioux City
Ida Grove
Rockwell City
Pocahontas
Clarion
Clear Lake

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2007
Manly
Osage
Charles City
Waterloo
Waverly

THURSDAY, AUGUST 16, 2007
Grundy Center
Ames
Des Moines
Oskaloosa
Ottumwa

FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2007
Centerville
Bloomfield
Keokuk
Burlington
Wapello
Iowa City

SATURDAY, AUGUST 18, 2007
Dubuque
Davenport
Cedar Rapids

SUNDAY, AUGUST 19, 2007
Des Moines

After a similar jaunt by Chris Dodd a month ago, during which singer/songwriter Paul Simon came along, I wonder if Edwards' will be bringing along any musical accompaniment of his own? Couldn't hurt!