Just get through the guy talking about electronics at what not and you'll see Yogi Berra introduce Rudy at a house party:

More YouTubes in the Vlog.

This is a bit old, but worth a minute of your time anyway. You probably saw that Fred Thompson caught flack from the Washington Post for saying in his stump speech that Americans have "shed more blood for other people's liberty than any other combination of nations in the history of the world.''

Well here's the other side of the coin, courtesy of Australian columnist Philip Adams, who serves up a grotesquely distorted view of America that begins with this:

How do I kill thee? Let me count the ways Americans have killed others and each other throughout their history. Oh, the body count might have been higher in Hitler's war or Stalin's Soviet Union or Mao's China. Nonetheless, no nation has a more bloodstained history than the US. And no other nation has such a culture of violence.

Take your blood pressure pills before reading the rest.

At last night's PBS presidential forum focused on African-American voters, the six "second tier" Republican candidates who attended ripped into the four "top tier" candidates who skipped the event. Mike Huckabee said he was "embarrassed for our party and I'm embarrassed for those who did not come." Senator Sam Brownback offered a personal apology to African-Americans for the slight: "I'm sorry to you and I'm sorry to those watching that they're not here." (Ken Herman, Columbus Dispatch)

On the subject of courting the black vote, Clinton and Obama will square off today at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Legislative Conference. (Todd Spangler, Detroit Free-Press).

Jill Lawrence of USA Today says it's "make or break time" for John McCain.

John Edwards reversed course yesterday by announcing he will accept public matching funds and challenging his rivals to join him. Don't hold your breath, John. The move will provide a short term boost for Edwards but the spending limits that come along with accepting public funds will leave him at up to a 10 to 1 spending disadvantage in early states. (Anne E. Kornblut and Matthew Mosk, Washington Post)

Ralph Z. Hallow of the Washington Times restates the obvious this morning: "Religious conservatives are at odds over which of the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination should get their backing."

Barack Obama got a rock star's reception in Hillary Clinton's back yard yesterday, and then proceeded to take a couple of shots at her. Jeff Zeleny of the New York Times has the goods. Video here.

Speaking of Hillary, conservative activists are shelling out $600k to try and derail her candidacy, reports Alexander Bolton of The Hill.

We discussed this yesterday, but in this morning's Boston Globe, Lisa Wangsness reports on the Romney camp's efforts to put a positive spin on his falling poll numbers in New Hamsphire.

Molly Ball reports there were approximately 60 protesters on hand for Vice President Cheney's visit to Las Vegas yesterday, including at least one suffering from late stage Cheney Derangement Syndrome:

"That man is evil," said Jim Hyder, a 67-year-old retired veteran wearing a T-shirt printed with the names of Americans who have died in the war and the words "Bush Lied" on the front, "They Died" on the back.

"I'm not a religious man, but he's the closest thing to the devil I've ever seen," said Hyder...

(Photo: John Locher, Las Vegas Review-Journal)

It's that time again: RealClearPolitics is hiring. We're looking for an obsessive political junkie and a voracious consumer of news, elections, commentary and opinion. Must have a tremendous work ethic, be computer/internet proficient and also be willing to keep slightly insane, off-beat hours. This is an entry level position. We're based in Chicago, but you don't have to be. If this sounds like you, email a short note and cv to job@realclearpolitics.com.

618 Dartmouth students participated in a post-debate poll last night. The good news for Hillary? She topped the list of those who thought she won the debate, winning 192 votes. The bad news? Obama beat Clinton 166 to 121 when students were asked who they were going to vote for in the primary.

Least surprising headline of the day: Romney hits Dems on gay issue.

Oy. Rep. Jim Moran gets "taken to the woodshed" by Jewish constituents for his remarks about AIPAC.

Via Ben Smith, a lawsuit's been filed against Michael Bloomberg's company, Bloomberg LP, alleging sex discrimination.

John Edwards said today that he would accept public financing and challenged his two rivals, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to do the same.

The Obama campaign moved swiftly to downplay a comment from wife Michelle that it must win Iowa.

John McCain gave a speech at the Hudson Institute today lashing out at the Democratic candidates for their "very dangerous thinking" on Iraq.

Finally, some political excitement in Wyoming.

License to Mahmoud. Richard Wager, the Republican challenger to freshman Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand in New York's 20th Congressional District, takes a poke at Governor Spitzer's new plan.

Bush Whacker: Dan Rather left open the possibility of calling both Bushes (41 and 43) as witnesses in his $70 million law suit against CBS News. Courage.

On the heels of my post below about Romney's recent slippage in New Hampshire, a new internal Romney campaign memo authored by strategist Alex Gage attempts to frame Romney's position in the national and state polls.

Gage touts Romney's accomplishments in the early states by writing that "as a result of our investment in advertising, grassroots organizing, and travel time, Gov. Romney has gone from an asterisk to competitive with the rest of the Republican field in Iowa and New Hampshire."

But he warns not to expect to see any lift in Romney's national numbers until after Iowa and New Hampshire:

As we move into the fall, our campaign will begin to expand to other early states - to South Carolina, Florida, and others. But it is important to remember that even then, we will not be measuring ourselves through the lens of national polls and we do not expect to be competitive in them. History shows us that candidates without nationwide name recognition do not become competitive in national primary polling until after they begin to ring up successes in the early states. Remember that John Kerry was hovering in single digits until he won the Iowa caucus. In just three weeks of January 2004, Kerry gained 40 points in nationwide Gallup polling. Looking at historical Gallup polls from previous election cycles, relatively-unknown candidates who succeed in the early states gain 16-40 points in national polls. (emphasis in the original)

Gage also downplays the idea that Romney has to win both Iowa and New Hampshire:

It is likely that Gov. Romney will continue to hover around 10% in national polls as he has for the past several months, and that he will gradually gain ground toward the end of the year as voters begin to pay more attention to the race. But we should not expect him to be competitive in national polls with better-known celebrity candidates like Giuliani, Thompson, or McCain until after Iowa and New Hampshire. By no means do we expect to win both Iowa and New Hampshire - no Republican in the modern era ever has.

Read the full text of the Gage memo below the jump.

(more...)

It's no secret former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's strategy for winning the Republican nomination hinges on racking up early wins in both Iowa and New Hampshire. But two recently released polls indicate Mr. Romney may be losing his grip on the Granite State, despite years of familiarity from nearby Boston TV coverage.

A Rasmussen Reports survey released last Tuesday showed Mr. Romney's lead over Rudy Giuliani dwindling over the course of the last month from 12 points to just three points. A survey by CNN and WMUR TV released yesterday indicated a similar downward trend: the 15-point lead Mr. Romney held over Mr. Giuliani in July is now down to a single point. Overall, Mr. Romney's lead in the RealClearPolitics Average for New Hampshire has slipped to 4%, its lowest level since the end of May.

Should Mr. Romney be worried? Yes. Is it time to hit the panic button? Not quite. The linchpin of his strategy is a win in Iowa, and right now the big lead he's built up in the Hawkeye State over the summer appears to be holding. Since winning the Ames straw poll at the beginning of August, Mr. Romney has extended his lead in the RealClearPolitics Average in Iowa by more than five points, now holding a 15.4% lead over his nearest competitor, Rudy Giuliani.

Conventional wisdom says that a win in Iowa will provide a bounce heading into New Hampshire. But one need look no further than the 2000 Republican primary -- when George Bush won the Iowa caucuses only to be trounced by John McCain by 18 points the following week in New Hampshire -- to see that's not always the case.

One factor working in Romney's favor this year is that a sizable majority of Independents -- the largest voting bloc in the state and eligible to vote in either primary -- appear to be leaning toward participating in the Democratic primary, which would lessen the chances of an Independent-fueled upset like Mr. McCain's.

But unlike President Bush, who rebounded from the loss in New Hampshire eight years ago with a hard fought victory in South Carolina, Mr. Romney has no such firewall to fall back on. He's currently running a distant fourth in South Carolina and 16 points off the pace in Florida, two states that will set the tone for the heap of delegates up for grabs on February 5th.

On the other hand, the addition of Michigan to the early primary schedule is a boon for Mr. Romney, who was born in Detroit and is the son of a former Michigan governor. But the benefit of a win by the Wolverine State's favorite son could be short lived if Mr. Romney suffers a defeat in New Hampshire.

The McCain campaign has unveiled two :30 television ads and a :60 radio spot that will begin airing statewide in New Hampshire.

Here the radio spot, along with a transcript.

National Review came out today against a Newt Gingrich run for the White House. In lauding Gingrich's undeniable impact on American politics and conservative politics in particular, NR nevertheless warns, "[s]licing up the considerable conservative vote into smaller shares would not, needless to say, advance the ideas he champions."

Generally, at this stage, no-shot candidates should be discouraged from joining the race (hello, Alan Keyes). They do little to advance the conversation with primary voters, but do much in gobbling up air time. Gingrich, however, doesn't fit that category. Even though NR believes that Gingrich won't win the nomination -- a good bet -- the former Speaker, much like Al Gore, would immediately vault into the first tier, if not by poll numbers than by how he can control a lot of the debate. Fact is, next to Gingrich, some of the other candidates would look like lightweights in the realm of policy and ideas. Is this what NR is getting at?

But the late entry of such a controversial conservative candidate to the presidential field wouldn't benefit the Republican party, or the Republic. There are already three top-tier candidates -- Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and John McCain -- contending to be the conservative alternative to Rudy Giuliani. With the support he manifestly enjoys among the grassroots, Gingrich would take his share from those conservatives unwilling to back Giuliani.

As NR indicates, a Gingrich candidacy would benefit Giuliani the most. And although NR doesn't say it explicitly, I see a bit of an anti-Rudy message underlining its anti-Newt editorial.