"We will move to proceed to this matter before we leave here. I"m going to do my utmost to do it by November 16," Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, said last night.

The proposal faced strong opposition from Republicans who objected to mixing immigration with the defense bill and who vowed to filibuster to defeat the measure if Democrats insisted on bringing it up now.

There is no upper age limit. Any illegal alien can walk into a U.S. Customs and Immigration Ser­vices office and declare that he is eligible. For example, a 45 year old can claim that he illegally entered the United States 30 years ago at the age of 15. There is no requirement that the alien prove that he entered the United States at the claimed time by providing particular documents. The DREAM Act's Section 4(a) merely requires him to "demonstrate" that he is eligible-which in practice could mean simply making a sworn statement to that effect. Thus, it is an invitation for just about every illegal alien to fraudulently claim the amnesty.

There might be a good law waiting to be made around the idea of a pass to illegal aliens who broke the law through the actions of their parents and not on their own accord. But this isn't it.

Reid and the other Democrats may give this another go, but without key Republicans and the White House on board, it's probably a lost cause for them.

Today, the Senate passed a State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) reauthorization bill that fails to focus on poor children, and instead creates a new entitlement program for higher income households. In fact, the bill specifically eliminates the requirement that states enroll 95% of children in households under 200% of the federal poverty level.

The President will veto this bill because it directs scarce funding to higher incomes at the expense of poor families.

We encourage Congress to send the President a continuing resolution extending SCHIP so coverage for the children who rely on the program will not be threatened. We should take this time to arrive at a more rational, bipartisan SCHIP reauthorization bill that focuses on children in poor families who don't currently have insurance, rather than raising taxes to cover people who already have private insurance.

New Virginia Senator James Webb tried an end run to stop the war in Iraq, by limiting the deployment options of the military. The idea of guaranteeing time between deployments made great sense rhetorically and it was hoped the idea of supporting the troops while stopping the war would enable them to pick off enough senators to get it done.

But it was not to be, as the WaPo reports, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is now giving up on clever strategies and going back to the old strategy which did not work last spring:

Instead, Reid will again push for a firm deadline, this time June 2008, along with a stronger effort at cutting off war funding.

"It's all definite timelines," Reid said.

The Senate will resume the war debate today, and Reid invited Republicans to offer proposals. His spokesman said that several possibilities are being negotiated, although it appeared unlikely they will meet the 60-vote threshold to pass.

If the Republicans lose Virginia, Nebraska, Colorado, New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon and Minnesota - and pick up no new seats - the Democrats will have 57 votes in the Senate (counting Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who votes with them). It's enough to let a new Democratic president have her way legislatively without too much trouble.

Rudy Giuliani took the MoveOn.org ad calling General David Petraeus, David "Betray Us," and made it a campaign plus for him. He's gone after them hard and rightfully so. General Petraeus made our esteemed elected leaders look even more buffoonish than usual. He was calm, answered their questions with authority and acted as one would expect a high-ranking military man to act, with class and dignity. MoveOn attacked a good man for partisan political purposes and Rudy is now using it as a weapon:

As for the candidates on the Dems side, Richard Cohen takes them to task today:

Almost instantly, though, it got pretty hard to find a Democratic presidential candidate willing to dispute MoveOn.org. To his credit, Joe Biden did. "I don't buy into that," he said. "This is an honorable guy. He's telling the truth." But lonesome Joe, whose virtues have yet to come to the attention of the vast and apathetic electorate, was seconded only by Joe Lieberman, not a presidential candidate, and John Kerry, a man whose tomorrow is yesterday. When Clinton was asked about the ad, she avoided answering.

It may seem unfair to single out Clinton in this matter when the bunker in which she took shelter was crowded with her fellow quivering candidates. But Clinton is the front-runner, quite possibly the next president of the United States, so it is reasonable to focus on her and wonder if, as some allege, she does indeed have a spine. In this instance, it was nowhere to be found.

This was the opportunity for Hillary Clinton so show that she has what it takes to be commander-in -chief (shudder) of the U.S. military and she punted. A more astute politician -- such as her husband -- would have seen the advantage of defending a career Army officer and highly regarded leader and bent over backwards to make it known that they didn't agree with the offensive ad. Clinton failed and Rudy grabbed the ball and ran with it. That action may have cemented his cred with conservatives who abhor the MoveOn crowd and conservative Democrats who feel Hillary has wandered a little too far into left field for their tastes (note: link to NY Times piece for TimeSelect members until midnight tonight).

MoveOn has accomplished two things with this inane ad campaign, a campaign they will continue to run: they've alienated a good portion of the electorate and pushed them toward Rudy who could hold them with his unique blend of social liberalism and national defense conservatism.

I don't know what to think. On the one hand, Bush AG appointee Michael Mukasey seems to be a stand up guy with a great resume and a solid career in civil service. On the other hand, Charles Schumer likes him. Phil reported earlier that there isn't likely to be much resistance to Mukasey, but conservatives still aren't sure whether they like this or not. On the anti- side we have Calabresi at Time:

But in dropping Olson and going with Mukasey, Bush has opened himself up to attack from the right. Conservatives are worried about Mukasey's 1994 denial of asylum for a Chinese man who said his wife had been forced to have an abortion under that country's one-child law, which they say indicates he's weak on pro-life issues. And though he has consistently ruled with the Administration on a number of important and high-profile terrorism cases, Mukasey broke with them in an early, crucial ruling, saying that American citizen Jose Padilla had a right to a lawyer, no matter what his status in the war on terror. Mukasey is also very close to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, whom social conservatives distrust.

On the pro- side we have Peter Wehrner at the Corner:

In case you haven't heard, President Bush announced the nomination of federal judge Michael Mukasey as his next (and hopefully last) attorney general.

Mukasey was appointed by Ronald Reagan, has a rep as a law and order guy and yet the Dems will probably not oppose him. Why? Because they likely suggested him among others to the White House as being acceptable. Highly unlikely the WH is looking for yet another fight with the Senate and looked for a compromise candidate.

How could Mukasey, a strict law and order guy, a right winger in most things, be a compromise candidate? Well, as a judge in the Jose Padilla case he stood up to the Bush's then AG (that would be Alberto Gonzales) and told them they needed to follow the law in prosecuting people. He was apparently suggested by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and since Schumer would be a key senator in the confirmation process, that is the telling clue.

The fact the WH is avoiding a fight over this nomination is telling as well. They really don't have the forces to take on a unified Dem team but fortunately for them, they don't have to. The national Dems keep backing away from the big fights: defunding the war and/or impeachment because they don't have the votes in the Senate. Maybe they're right but some people think they should try. There's still 16 months of this Administration and so far they have reduced America to being something less than a super power, ravaged the military, the treasury, and can't even clean up after a hurricane. They're so incompetent it boggles the mind but at least they've stopped fighting over the AG. Let's hope this one can restore some professionalism at the Justice Department. It's long overdue.

Chafee said he disaffiliated with the party he had helped lead, and his father had led before him, because the national Republican Party has gone too far away from his stance on too many critical issues, from war to economics to the environment.

Ironically, after all of Chafee's opposition to the Republican policies he disagreed with, the party helped him survive a primary challenge from the right, from former Cranston Mayor Stephen P. Laffey. National Republican leaders supported Chafee, having concluded that even though Chafee had voted against many of President Bush's initiatives, including authorizing the Iraq war, he was the only Republican who could win in Rhode Island.

Would Senator Chafee have stayed a Republican if the GOP had retained control of the Senate? The NRSC had better hope that the answer to that is yes, because otherwise, they spent a ton of money to safely place a Democrat in Rhode Island forever. As it is they have some explaining to do, considering that the slender reed that justified keeping was his vote for the GOP caucus, is gone.

The GOP's ability to recapture the Senate required miraculous intervention before, and now they have one more seat to make up.

Abraham Lincoln has a big memorial statue and Sen. Larry Craig gets... a bathroom stall. Well, Abraham Lincoln was a president, so it is understandable.

Yes, the infamous Minneapolis bathroom stall has now become a tourist attraction of sorts. According to the AP, travelers from all over the world who pass through the airport ask to be directed to the infamous stall where the notorious "hand signal" that led to Craig's disturbing the peace misdemeanor conviction occurred. The conviction also led to a lot of embarrassment for the Republicans and cast more dark clouds over the Senate as a whole as it reaffirmed in many people's eyes the negative stereotype of elected officials being self absorbed elitists. Of course, this is not of many elected officials – or even Craig for that matter – but for many, perception is reality.

While the entire Craig episode has been reduced to a comedic vehicle for pundits, the truth of the matter is that with the nation at war, a looming mortgage crisis, climate change, etc, the public needs (and demands) strong and solid leadership. The emergence of the "Craig bathroom attraction" highlights what has become endemic to the woes of the very unpopular Congress and its foibles as public disapproval grows.

For many years, unacceptable sexual activity has been the norm in Washington, D.C. That all changed with the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Closets were opened and improper activity was quickly punished. The accused was immediately shunned. The concept of fair trial was gone. The opposing party attacked to gain an advantage. The member party, secured the rope and hung the accused without a trial.

As a Catholic, I saw this happen in my church. For years, priests who abused children were allowed to continue to serve in the community. They were promoted and allowed to harm more children. Then, the crap hit the fan. Things changed. Some might say for the better. However, under the new plan, innocent priests who were accused were immediately punished and removed from their job. They lost a career and financial support. Some of these priests have been proven to be innocent. However, nobody seems to care as long as the problem is resolved. However, shouldn't we care about the innocent priest who served the community and was unjustly accused?

Senator Larry Craig was not guilty of a crime. He should keep his seat. The press, the Democrats and the Republicans must start thinking about the individual. Our country was built of the concept of a fair trial. It is nice to see that the Washington Post has come out to say that Craig did not commit a crime. Instead, he pleaded guilty with the promise his actions would be kept secret. They were not.

According to the AP, it would appear that President Bush may have settled on his choice for Attorney General and it is possibly (nothing is official yet) Michael Mukasey. Bush's previous top choice was the former solicitor general Theodore Olsen, the man who had become famous for successfully representing Bush before the Supreme Court in 2000 to settle the contesting of the presidency. Olsen's name, however, was pulled off the table after Democrats in the Senate threatened to block the nomination.

Mukasey would replace Alberto Gonzales, an Attorney General whose tenure was not exactly a dynamic one. In fact, many grass roots conservatives were happy to see him go as they generally considered him a fairly weak Attorney General without a clear agenda.

Mukasey is a moderate and would probably be more acceptable to the Senate, although there is some grumblings in the conservative base about his possible selection. Generally, the conservative base is lukewarm about moderates in positions of power, but there needs to be a bowing to reality on this issue. Without the votes to successfully confirm a candidate, the candidate will not be confirmed. This process of Senate confirmation was devised by the founding fathers as a means to limit executive powers and that is the way the system works.

U.S. Sen. George Voinovich, largely silent in the weeks since a visit to Baghdad, said today he is proposing a middle-ground plan to hasten withdrawal of American troops from the four-year-old Iraq war.

The Ohio Republican would draw down troops next spring to at least the level before this year's surge, leaving 130,000 troops, possibly fewer. He also would demand "a new definition of the mission in the country," he said, one in which the United States supports Iraqis as they take control of their fractious nation.

This would be "a well-thought out, concrete plan that would redefine our mission there, that would make very clear to the region -- the Iraqis, the Sunnis, the Shiites and the Kurds -- that there is light at the end of the tunnel," he said.

Sen. John Sunnunu, R-N.H., might as well pack his bags. He can barely get a 43% approval rating and now former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen is going to run for his seat. From an e-mail sent to the press

because we have major problems facing this country, and there is an urgent need for real change in Washington," Shaheen said. "We've proven in New Hampshire that we can work together to get things done. I want to take that common-sense approach to Washington and help get this country moving in the right direction."

"I gave Ted some old furniture," Allen said. "I don't think there was a lot of material. There was some labor."

The workers were Veco employees, probably one to four at a time, Allen said. He said the work on the home lasted for "probably a couple of months." Later, he said it might have been as much as six months. The remodeling work in summer and fall 2000 more than doubled the size of the house, a four-bedroom structure that is Stevens' official residence in Alaska.

During a phone interview Monday, Ellis said she met regularly with Vitter in the French Quarter aprartment and that he paid her through her pimp, Jonathan, whose last name she did not know. She said Vitter met her through the New Orleans Escort Service, not through the madam whose notorious Canal Street brothel was raided by federal agents in 2001. Although that madam, Jeanette Maier, claimed in interviews that Vitter patronized her brothel and favored a prostitute named Wendy...

Overall this is more bad news for the GOP strategy of taking back the Senate. Chuck Hagel is retiring, and will not run for the presidency either (although that was always a long shot).

This leaves yet another open seat in a deep red state in the West. Normally conventional wisdom says that these seats are locks for Republican candidates, but the election last year of Jon Tester in Montana proved that Democrats can win these seats with the right candidate.

Last week Larry Craig announced his resignation, leaving an open seat in Idaho and earlier this year, the untimely death of Craig Thomas left an open seat in Wyoming. But Democrats may find this latest open battle in Nebraska may be the easiest to pickup. The article above reports that former senator Bob Kerrey has voiced his interest in running again and would be a formidable candidate.

For the Republicans, chances of taking back the Senate are dimming, forcing the party to win or die with the presidency.