KS Gov Sebelius' Democratic Response to the SOTU

That's my Governor.

Transcript here.

Rumors are Gov. Sebelius going to endorse Barack Obama on "Tuesday or Wednesday." If so, I'm guessing it'll probably be Tuesday when Obama will be in Eldorado, Ks., "his grandparents' hometown."

Also, I know that it's putting the cart before the horse, but it's not surprising that there is further speculation that Sebelius may be lined up to become Obama's running-mate should he win the nod. We'll see. Obama's still got a steep hill to finish climbing with only a week before Super Tuesday. I do think that she would be a great choice for a number of reasons though. She's a two term red state Gov with a 64% approval rating who knows how to get the job done, and she aint afraid to go up against the big energy boys to do what's right.

I can see a few reasons to suspect Sebelius is aspiring, deservedly so imho, for bigger and better things. She's been making rounds outside the state for a while now. She's also featured in Feb's Vogue magazine (hence the pic), and conspiracy theorists will just love the fact that she attended a gathering of the Bilderberg Group, "a select group of international business leaders, diplomats, thinkers and statesmen," in Istanbul, Turkey last year. Just like Clinton and Bush!! Oh No! Get real. Alright, sorry about that, but I've already seen it on threads so I know it will only increase if she does move up the food chain, as she seems poised to do. Is her next stop going to be Cheney's place? Who knows? If so, I sure hope she consults a feng shui expert, exorcist, or something along those lines before she moves in to make it suitable living quarters for the undead, but I digress. I'd say it all adds up to one really classy lady with the smarts to match who's ready for whatever comes next, so it's no surprise the movers and shakers would want to hear from her.

[Update] Lest anyone think I'm way out there bringing up the whole Bilderberg thing the way I did, here's the KC Star reporting on yet another visit to the mysteriously elite Bilderberg group, this time in VA.:

Illuminati watch

For the second year in a row, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius attended a gathering of the Bilderberg Group. ...

AP: Obama Wins Backing of Kansas Governor

Complete Democratic Debate at UNLV 11-15-07

It took a while, and several attempts to get this up on google video. This is the full-length (2 hr) debate at UNLV, Las Vegas Nevada on Nov 15, 2007. See a highlight video from this debate with a minute or so of each candidate's applause-getters here.

Most noteworthy is the 6 min back and forth between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to start the night, and then Wolf Blitzer's snub of John Edwards, not allowing him to respond after Hillary accused him of "throwing mud" and using tactics out of "the right-wing playbook," choosing instead to go to Joe Biden. That was a real debate-killer for Edwards courtesy of CNN. Also noteworthy is the softball question to Hillary to close the debate and the controversy surrounding it.

How fair was CNN in moderating the debate? You decide:

Also:

Full Democratic Presidential Debate at Drexel University 10-30-07

ABC News Iowa Democratic Debate 8-19-07

ABC News Iowa Democratic Debate 8-19-07

Here's just a few of the applause getting moments:

I also posted the complete ABC News Iowa Democratic Debate here (55 min).

TPM's Election Central:

Election Central Debate Roundup

This morning's ABC News Democratic debate in Des Moines was very good in a lot of ways, with some of the most substantive discussions of policy that we've seen at any televised debate up until now. (...)

Chris Dodd's campaign released this chart comparing how much time each candidate got to talk — showing their man second only to Mike Gravel in being given the least time to say anything:

(do go see Election Central's full point by point Iowa debate breakdown)

Update: TPMtv has video from the debate too: TPM's Iowa Dem Debate Round-Up

Govt Shutdown Looming After Aug Recess?

Roll Call's Ben Pershing discusses the possibility of a Dem-Bush showdown after the Aug. recess that many voices (mainly on the right) are saying could lead to a government shutdown like what happened in '95.

Here's the link to the (subscription req) Roll Call article:

Both Sides Prep For Repeat of ’95

The coming appropriations veto battle between the president and Congress already appears to be the most significant spending scrum since the partial government shutdown in 1995, and both sides are preparing to point fingers if there is a repeat of history. ...

And here's the WSJ article they also mentioned:

Hurdles Await Congress After Recess
Spending Measures Come Under Threat of Presidential Veto

WASHINGTON -- Congress's Democratic majority made major strides toward implementing its domestic agenda before going home, but will face a large hurdle when lawmakers return at summer's end: President Bush.

Farm, lobbying reform, energy, education and child health insurance bills all advanced in a volatile 10-day march before the recess, establishing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as a legislative player. "She was Jaws," joked Rep. George Miller (D., Calif.) after watching the speaker move around the House floor rounding up votes for the energy bill, her "flagship" priority.

But in the rush to adjourn, Republican anger erupted over a miscalled, late-night House vote. And come September, Democrats dread the prospect of reconciling a dozen spending measures, most of which face veto threats from the president. "I'm waiting for August never to end," sighed Rep. Henry Waxman (D., Calif.).

The new Democratic majority is determined to avoid the sort of government shutdown Washington experienced when Republicans took over Congress in 1995 and challenged then-President Clinton. But the situation is more unpredictable today because of the relative weakness of both sides, and the Iraq war added to the political equation.

The war's impact is twofold. Mr. Bush's fall in the polls because of the war appears to have fed his desire for a confrontation over spending to shore up his support on the right. "He's desperate for a fight," said Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel, chairman of the House Democratic caucus.

At the same time, the emotions stirred by Iraq -- and antiwar pressures from the left -- lead Democrats to be more confrontational with the president even when they know they need to find compromises on domestic issues.

"It's a split screen," admits Mr. Emanuel, who served in the Clinton White House.

With a new fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, all these forces will come to bear quickly next month. Before adjourning early yesterday morning, the House approved a $459.6 billion Pentagon budget that will be a major bargaining chip as Democrats try to hold on to an estimated $22 billion that they have added to the president's spending requests for domestic agencies

House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.) admits the $22 billion is a "high water mark" for Democrats. "Our numbers aren't set in stone, I would like to have a deal," Mr. Obey said. But the added domestic spending should be judged, he argued, alongside the president's own added requests for the war and a new set of arms sales in the Middle East.

Much depends on a report to Congress in mid-September from the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus. But the White House long ago requested $141.7 billion to keep funding war operations after Oct. 1, and that price tag is rising.

The Pentagon wants $5.3 billion more to buy mine-resistant armored vehicles, and Mr. Obey predicted that foreign-aid requests could swell by about $5 billion to help finance proposed Mideast arms sales. The biggest variable is the fact that the $141.7 billion request isn't sufficient to maintain current troop levels in Iraq past Sept. 30.

If these operations and personnel costs are factored in, some estimates indicate it could add as much as $30 billion on an annual basis.

While the House has completed all 12 of its annual spending bills, the Senate lags far behind with little chance of meeting the Oct. 1 deadline. In the past, Congress has relied on stopgap measures to keep the government funded, but that will be harder to do this year.

Ms. Pelosi is determined not to go down this path for long, since it freezes spending at current levels and undercuts her party's domestic initiatives. The Pentagon would also be unhappy since it has assumed a $40 billion-plus increase in its core budget after Oct. 1.

With so many moving pieces, including the pressure from some Democrats to fund the war on more of a short-term basis, the risk of a legislative train wreck only increases.

At the same time, the departure of White House Budget Director Rob Portman, who was respected in Congress, has left a serious void. The Senate went home without confirming Mr. Portman's successor, former Iowa Rep. Jim Nussle. Mr. Nussle's combative history contributed to this delay, but the end result is no Cabinet-level budget negotiator will be in place until he is confirmed.

Mr. Bush needs the support of little more than one third of Congress to sustain any vetoes, but the larger political fight will be determined on the broader question of who is seen by voters as trying to reach consensus and who is not.

Republicans were hurt in 1995, for example, when their speaker, Newt Gingrich, was seen as being too aggressive and bullying toward Mr. Clinton. Today, the Senate's sharp-tongued Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) is a target for Republicans, whose leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) casts himself as a gentler figure more willing to reason.

Ms. Pelosi is a harder target and avoids showing any personal animus toward the president. "We get along great, we really do," she says. Republicans were furious and walked off the House floor Thursday when a vote was mistakenly called early by Democrats. The leadership issued an apology and accepted a request for a bipartisan panel to look into the matter.

To the extent Democrats have used tax increases or loophole closings to help pay for added spending, it has been harder to get Republican votes. But between two and three dozen Republicans joined with Ms. Pelosi on some of the key energy votes Saturday, and before going home, Senate Democrats won a bipartisan 68-31 vote for their children's health-insurance bill.

House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio has urged an aggressive veto strategy, but the sequence of floor votes last month on the labor, health and education funding bill is telling of where his fellow Republicans stand.

No Republican proposed to cut to the level Mr. Bush proposed, about $3.6 billion below this year. Instead the toughest Republican amendment was a freeze -- and that got just 136 votes, less than a third of the House. When Republicans seem most comfortable -- and consistently get a third of the House -- has been supporting amendments cutting 1% from the Democratic bills.

YearlyKos

Great video from YearlyKos Presidential
candidates forum from TPMtv:

TPM:

I may not have made it to Chicago this year, but I've learned a few things from the tubes about what the Democratic presidential candidates were up to at YearlyKos:

* Hillary Clinton's defense of accepting contributions from lobbyists was probably the day's most controversial comment (Watch the video). She seemed to get to the right answer, but it took a couple of tries.

* John Edwards was in his element today.

* Barack Obama was excellent in his private off-the-record session -- so much so that he probably shouldn't have been speaking off-the-record. ...

* Chris Dodd was clever enough to hit Rupert Murdoch and Bill O'Reilly in a single answer. ...

More Presidential Leadership Forum video HERE.