It's a cultural cliche: Americans don't care about the past. De Tocqueville noticed it in the 1830s, speculating that in 50 years Americans would know less about the America he visited than the French knew about the Middle Ages. Nearly two centuries later, people are still making the point.

Five years ago, Bruce Cole, the chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, bemoaned a "worsening of our case of American amnesia." His evidence? More than half of high school seniors didn't know whom we fought in World War II; 18 percent thought Germany was our ally.

This is bad news for Barack Obama. As a candidate, the junior senator from Illinois has several advantages over the junior senator from New York. He's more charismatic, he's less polarizing and he's a fresh face at a time when many Americans are sick of the old ones. But in the Democratic primary, surely his biggest advantage is that a little more than five years ago, he denounced the Iraq war and Hillary Clinton voted for it. In other words, on what many Democrats consider the biggest issue of their adult lives, he was right and she was wrong.

Yet he's getting virtually no credit for it. In late September, when The Post and ABC News asked Democrats nationally whom they trusted most on the war, Obama trailed Clinton by 30 points. Even among Democrats who support an immediate withdrawal, he trailed her by more than 25 points, in a recent Pew poll. That's true in the early primary states, as well. In New Hampshire, for instance, according to the Los Angeles Times, likely Democratic primary voters who say they want U.S. troops out of Iraq "as soon as possible" choose Clinton over Obama by more than 2 to 1.

How is this possible? Part of it is that Clinton has moved steadily and skillfully toward where most Democrats are. She now regularly pledges that if President Bush doesn't end the war, she will. Critics say she's fudging - that asterisks in her plan would keep combat troops in Iraq as far as the eye can see. But most Democratic voters don't seem to care. From what they can tell, there's no difference between Clinton and her opponents. As of today, she's as antiwar as anyone else.

That's why the 2002 vote is so important. If the debate is about Iraq today, Obama looks like he's splitting hairs. But if he can get Democrats to focus on 2002, he has a clean shot. So he keeps bringing it up, saying his original opposition to the war proves he has the judgment to be president and that (by implication) Clinton does not.

And that's where Obama runs smack into America's strange indifference to the past. Recent American history is littered with candidates who were right about war and weren't rewarded at election time. In 1972, when most Americans considered Vietnam a mistake, they still overwhelmingly rejected George McGovern, an early war critic, in favor of Richard Nixon, an early supporter. In 1992, they spurned George H.W. Bush, who had recently presided over a stunning victory in the Persian Gulf War, in favor of Bill Clinton, who famously said he would have backed the war if the congressional vote had been close but that he agreed with the arguments against it. (On Election Day, only 10 percent of American voters told pollsters that they even considered foreign policy a major issue.)

And in 2004, Iowa Democrats chose John Kerry, who, like Hillary Clinton, had voted for the war, over Howard Dean, who, like Obama, had denounced it. Dean's opposition initially propelled him to the front of the pack. But in the homestretch, when Kerry co-opted Dean's antiwar and anti-Bush message and voted against $87 billion in war funding, Democrats forgave and forgot.

In the end, Iowa caucus voters who said they strongly disapproved of the war still backed Kerry over Dean by five percentage points.

So what's Obama to do? He has to convince voters that his original antiwar stance still matters, that it's the key to understanding what makes him and Clinton different now. That's why Obama keeps trying to connect Clinton's Iraq vote to her recent vote designating Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist group, suggesting that once again she is giving Bush the green light to launch a war.

Unfortunately for him, history doesn't generally repeat. The Iran resolution was rewritten to avoid any suggestion of military force precisely because Senate Democrats don't want to make the same mistake twice. In a sense, Obama should be flattered. On foreign policy, Clinton is not the same person she was five years ago. Much of what she says about the Middle East these days represents a tacit acknowledgment that she was wrong and he was right. Unfortunately, in our amnesiac country, you don't get elected president by saying, "I told you so."

By Peter Beinart, Union Leader, November 30, 2007

NEW YORK - Hillary Clinton narrowly leads the pack of Democratic hopefuls in New Hampshire, with Barack Obama coming in a close second. In addition, while Bill Richardson is barely on the radar screen nationally, he receives double-digit support in the Granite State and comes in fourth behind John Edwards.

A FOX News poll of likely New Hampshire Democratic voters finds that Clinton has the support of 30 percent followed by Obama at 23 percent. Edwards comes in third with 17 percent, Richardson receives the support of 12 percent. All other candidates receive 3 percent or less.

Although Clinton has a slim advantage in the trial heat, slightly more Democratic primary voters say they would be very or somewhat satisfied if Obama (74 percent satisfied) were the party's presidential nominee than if Clinton won (69 percent satisfied).

"We seem to be seeing a softening in the Clinton vote everywhere," said Opinion Dynamics CEO John Gorman. "The inevitability of a month ago has been replaced by serious sound thoughts. What's interesting is that this seems to be not a surge to second place Obama, but reexamination of candidates even farther down the list. Edwards is closer to Obama than Obama to Clinton and Richardson closer to Edwards than Edward to Obama. An Edwards second or a Richardson third might shake things up as much as a Hillary defeat."

Looking at the primary vote among some key groups, by a 33 percent to 24 percent margin, women favor Clinton over Obama. And married women are even more likely to back Clinton (38 percent to 24 percent).

Among men the results are more evenly divided, although Clinton still has the advantage: 26 percent say they would vote for Clinton, followed by Obama at 21 percent, Edwards at 18 percent and Richardson at 14 percent.

Voters with a college degree split almost evenly between Clinton (26 percent) and Obama (24 percent); voters without a college degree strongly back Clinton by a margin of 42 percent to 17 percent for Obama and 16 percent for Edwards.

Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire say the most important issue in deciding their vote is the candidate's position on the Iraq war (36 percent), followed by health care (25 percent) and the economy (18 percent).

Voters who put Iraq and health care at the top of their list are slightly likely to support Clinton. Among economy voters, Clinton (41 percent) is the clear choice, as she outperforms Obama (27 percent) by a double-digit margin.

The poll finds that these New Hampshire Democratic voters are looking for the candidate who is the "most honest and trustworthy;" nearly one third of voters (32 percent) say this is the most important quality in deciding which candidate to support. The other top factors include having "the right experience" (22 percent), understanding "average Americans" (16 percent) and having "new ideas" (13 percent).

Both Obama (28 percent) and Edwards (24 percent) top Clinton (18 percent) among those looking to vote for the "most honest and trustworthy" candidate.

Obama has a significant advantage among voters who are looking for new ideas (51 percent to 17 percent for Clinton).

For voters who say they are looking for a candidate with the right experience, Clinton is the clear choice (55 percent) and Richardson comes in second (22 percent) followed by Obama in the single-digits (7 percent).

With less than 40 days until they go to the polls for New Hampshire's January 8 primary, more than 4 in 10 Democrats say they are "extremely interested" in the election, and half say they have settled on the candidate they will support.

More Clinton voters are committed to their candidate than Obama voters are: A 70 percent majority of Clinton's supporters say they are certain to vote for her, while 56 percent of Obama's supporters say they are certain to back him.

The telephone poll was conducted for FOX News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 1,000 likely presidential primary voters in New Hampshire, including 500 likely Democratic primary voters, from Nov. 27 to Nov. 29. The entire poll has a 3-point error margin and a 4 point error for the subgroup of Democratic presidential primary voters.

By Dana Blanton, FOX News, November 30, 2007

A tense standoff at a presidential campaign office of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Rochester, N.H., ended shortly after 6 p.m. this evening when a man later identified as Leeland Eisenberg was taken into police custody after holding at least four people hostage. There were no apparent injuries.

Mr. Eisenberg was described by friends and relatives as despondent, with his wife recently asking for a divorce. One person said he had been drinking for 72 hours before he entered the campaign office. Mr. Eisenberg also called CNN to rant about the state of the nation’s mental health system, the network reported.

Once the situation was resolved, Mrs. Clinton said, "I am very grateful that this difficult day has ended so well."

Mrs. Clinton praised the "courage" of both the hostages and their families, who she said she spoke to throughout the day and then left to fly to New Hampshire to join them.

Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, was preparing to give a speech in suburban Virginia at a Democratic National Committee forum, but immediately canceled it upon hearing the news of the unfolding events. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, also canceled an event scheduled for tonight in New York City.

"Everything stopped," Mrs. Clinton said, "We had nothing on our minds except the safety of these young people."

Bill Shaheen, a co-chairman of Mrs. Clinton's New Hampshire and national campaign, said that the campaign had received no specific threat against Mrs. Clinton.

Rochester Police Captain Paul Callaghan, in a telephone interview, said they were alerted to the situation when a woman carrying a baby ran out of the Clinton campaign office around 12:30 p.m., crying and going to the nearby Carney Medical Supply company.

"A young woman with a 6-month- or 8-month-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears," Lettie Tzizik, a Carney employee told the local television station WMUR. "You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape."

The police then began sealing off the area, evacuating local businesses, residents and one grade school. The campaign office of Senator Barack Obama, only a few doors down the street, was also evacuated. The usually serene town of Rochester was transformed into a garrison, with bomb squad teams, heavily armed officers with their weapons drawn and armored vehicles encircling to office, located in a storefront of small red-brick building at 28 Main Street.

Inside, Mr. Eisenberg ordered everyone to the floor, demanded to speak to Mrs. Clinton, and then allowed the woman to take her child and leave. Ms. Tzizik said the woman who had been released told her there were four paid staff members and two volunteers in the office when the man entered.

The campaign workers were frightened for their lives despite assurances by Mr. Eisenberg that he would not harm them.A man identified only as Daniel, an office volunteer for the Clinton campaign who was not in the office at the time, told WMUR that when he heard the news, he called a friend being held hostage on her cell phone.

She was "very hysterical," he said, but she also told him that Mr. Eisneberg said his intention was not to hurt them, only to talk to Mrs. Clinton. Daniel said he called the woman back four or five times. "He let her answer her cell phone, which was nice," Daniel said. "It gave me some kind of peace of mind." Daniel said the woman told him that the suspect, Mr. Eisenberg, had a device strapped to his chest and that it "looked like a bomb."

Mr. Eisenberg did not have a gun, the girl in the office said.

About an hour after he entered the office, Mr. Eisenberg released another hostage in one of the more dramatic moments of the stand-off.

Six heavily armed law enforcement officers were shown on television making their way slowly to the office around 2 p.m., forming a human shield. When they got to the door, they tossed in a package.The officers, weapons drawn, then backed slowly away a few yards from the entrance of the office. Moments later, the woman in the green sweater emerged. She walked slowly at first and then ran, with an officer by her side, to safety behind an armored vehicle. On the video, she looked distraught.

Shortly after 6:15, a young man, presumably one of the last hostages, was led out of the office.

Moments later, Mr. Eisenberg was led out of the office - an older man, wearing a white shirt, dress pants and a tie. He unwrapped a large piece of clear plastic from around his body and held his hands in the air. He then lay down spread eagle on the street and was patted down by police. A state police explosives unit moved into the office.

Local and national television stations did not show the video live for security reasons, at the request of police, national cable channels reported.

A profile of Mr. Eisenberg also started to develop, with several accounts of his recent marital troubles and depression.

Mr. Eisenberg had been scheduled to appear in Strafford County Superior Court at 1:30 p.m. today with his wife for a domestic violence hearing, according to WMUR.

Herman Ejarque, the co-owner and manager of the nearby Governor's Inn, said in a telephone interview that a relative of Mr. Eisenberg had come into the inn about 2 o’clock this afternoon after being interviewed by police. The man, whose relationship to the suspect was not clear - he is either the son, step-son or son-in-law 0 talked with the inn's front-desk receptionist, Chelsea Coul, telling her he was cold and looking for a cup of coffee but the town had been evacuated and everything was shut down.

The man told Ms. Coul that the suspect's wife had sought a divorce a few months ago and that he was unemployed and "hasn't been in the right state of mind" for three months. Ms. Coul said the man told her that the suspect had been drinking for 72 hours and that he needed help and quoted the suspect as saying, "I don't know what to do with my life."

He also said he believed the suspect was "harmless."

The man told Ms. Coul that the suspect had asked him where he could buy roadside flares.

It was not clear what kind of weapons Mr. Eisenberg actually carried into the office.

An area of roughly four-to-five-square blocks was sealed off as heavily armed officers, weapons drawn, took up positions around the office, and armored vehicles were seen moving along local streets as helicopters circled overhead.

Mrs. Clinton has 16 similar field offices across the state. It would be unusual for there to be security since the satellite offices are meant to be inviting and a gathering place for volunteers.

The office in Rochester was typical, resembling a storefront shop, with a blue "Hillary" banner in the window.

As it became evident that the hostage crisis was real, Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, made an announcement in a ballroom of the Sheraton Premier Hotel at Tysons Corner, Va., where a forum was taking place. All the major Democratic presidential candidates except Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut were scheduled to address the group.

Gasps were heard from the crowd of several hundred delegates and party officials.

"Details are sketchy at this time," Mr. Dean said. "We will keep them in our prayers and hope for a resolution of this situation."

Mrs. Clinton's rivals, Senator Obama, former Senator John Edwards and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson had already spoken.

Mrs. Clinton had just arrived at the hotel when reports of the hostage situation began to trickle in. She was in private meetings in the hotel, officials said, when the decision was made that she would not address the D.N.C. It was not for her own security reasons, officials said, but rather out of a concern for her staff in New Hampshire. Aides said she wanted to go monitor developments.

When Mr. Dean made the announcement that her speech had been canceled, dozens of her supporters wearing "Hillary" shirts began to leave.

As he addressed the D.N.C. this afternoon, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware commented on the incident, saying he heard about it as he was driving out here. "I pray to God it all works out as she heads to New Hampshire," Mr. Biden said.

When the ordeal ended, Mrs. Clinton would not go into the details of what had happened, saying that was for the police. But her relief was evident.

"This has been a very hard day for all of us in our campaign," she said. "I want to thank them for their extraordinary courage and coolness under some very difficult pressures and dangerous situations."

By Marc Santora and Katharine Q. Seelye, The New York Times, November 30, 2007

DES MOINES - In the midst of one of this city's more struggling neighborhoods, the music rocked and Sen. Barack Obama swayed and clapped to the rhythm at Union Missionary Baptist Church. When associate minister Calvin Lewis rose to the pulpit, he prayed the Illinois Democrat would "soar from the back streets of Chicago to the White House."

A few minutes later, state Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad suggested God has helped level the playing field for Obama. "So, there is nothing the senator can't do," he said, introducing the Democratic presidential candidate.

Far removed from pancake breakfasts and school gymnasiums, the scene last Sunday at one of Iowa's most iconic black churches was not one typically associated with campaigning in heavily white Iowa.

But Obama, perhaps more than any other presidential candidate, is seeking to reach out to African-Americans and other minority groups in a state where they represent just 7 percent of the population and an even smaller proportion of likely participants in the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses.

As the Democratic candidates gather here for Saturday's Iowa Black & Brown Presidential Forum, it will be the first time racial issues have taken center stage in a state better known for debates about ethanol and Social Security.

That is despite this being the most diverse Democratic field in history, with a black man (Obama), a woman (Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York) and a Hispanic (New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson).

In many ways, the discussion on Saturday will also be about later contests in states such as South Carolina and Nevada with significantly larger minority populations.

Even in Iowa, however, winning requires building coalitions. With the race here exceptionally tight among Obama, Clinton and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, several thousand votes could make a difference amid turnout for the caucuses not expected to exceed 150,000 people.

Obama's campaign has 14 staff workers in Iowa dedicated to reaching out to various groups, ranging from African-Americans to Hispanics to veterans. "It's a much deeper relationship when you can reach people on issues that really matter to them," said Michael Blake, Obama's deputy political director in Iowa and the leader of the outreach effort. Since March, Blake, an African American himself, has worked across the state to help Obama network with various niche populations. He took the candidate to a first black church in Iowa on Palm Sunday. That stop was in Sioux City, a western Iowa community not typically considered one of the state's more concentrated for blacks. Obama has also made five visits to Waterloo, where 12.4 percent of the population is black. He has met privately there with African-American ministers and repeatedly spoken on black radio stations.

"There are so many registered Democrats who have never caucused before," Blake said. "We want them to feel invested."

Clinton, meanwhile, said she has no intention of surrendering the minority vote to any candidate. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, is exceptionally popular with many African-Americans.

"We are trying to run a comprehensive outreach campaign to every constituency," she said in a Tribune interview this week. "The goal is to try to get supporters in every one of those precincts, so we are certainly making a concerted effort to persuade Iowans from every part of the state to come and caucus for me."

To hear Obama in a black church, meanwhile, is a very different experience than seeing him at other campaign stops. When he addresses African-American audiences, a different cadence emerges, along with more animation and slang. To establish his credentials, he first told those at Union Missionary that he was bringing them greetings from his pastor at "Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street on the South Side of Chicago," drawing applause. He then thanked Blake and another staff member, calling them "a couple fine brothers." Throughout his 18-minute speech, Obama was repeatedly interrupted with "that's right," "amen" and "alright," as he used the refrain "it's not going to be easy" when he talked about making changes.

The nation often forgets about slavery's toll, Obama told the roughly 250 people gathered. "Some folks still have barriers before them, barriers of discrimination, lack of education, families that have disintegrated because this country has systematically devalued the black family," he said.

Obama was nearly yelling when he addressed economic matters. "If you're workin' you shouldn't be poor," he said. "If you're workin' full time, you should be able to afford to support a family."

Obama expressed both optimism and pessimism on whether blacks will turn out in greater numbers than in past elections. "Folks who haven't voted in a long time, they're thinking maybe I should vote this time," he said. "Cousin Pookie, he's off on the corner somewhere, he says, 'You know, I might vote this time because I know we need a change.'"

Later, he said he realizes how some think the nation is not ready for a black president and worry about his safety. "First of all, I've got Secret Service and they're good," he said. "So I just say be strong and have courage because God is walking with us."

Michelle Obama said her husband has various levels of emotion in his speech and does not always believe a fiery presentation is appropriate. "Barack struggles with authenticity, and he doesn't always want people to be taken away by the passion of the moment because the problems that we face are really serious," she said in an interview this week. "There are moments when he can go there…But to be there all the time is not realistic and it's not helpful because then people feel like in order for [him] to do anything, you've got to sing and dance, you gotta make me laugh."




By John McCormick, Chicago Tribune, November 30, 2007

Barack Obama stepped onto the Clintons' turf in the fight for the black vote last night, appearing at the historic Apollo Theater in Harlem, near the office President Clinton has worked in since he left the Oval Office.

Obama didn't speak much about the Clintons, but comedian Chris Rock did.

He told the audience they'd be "real embarrassed" if Obama won and they had been backing Clinton instead. "You'd say, 'I had that white lady! What was I thinking," he said, according to the Associated Press.

Obama's Harlem fundraiser came in a week in which Hillary Clinton picked up the endorsements of a group of black ministers in South Carolina, while Oprah Winfrey announced she would campaign for Obama. And the Reverend Jesse Jackson, who had his own historic presidential run two decades ago, blasted the Democratic candidates for not focusing on the issues of Africans Americans, a rebuke that undoubtedly referred to both Obama, whom Jackson has praised in the past, and Hillary Clinton, whose husband Jackson has previously supported.

Obama and Clinton are courting influential African Americans, anticipating what could be a pivotal primary in South Carolina in January, where blacks make up roughly half the population. But the most important voices in swaying the black vote are likely to be white: the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Polls this year have shown black voters have serious doubts that America will elect an African American president, which gives them another push toward a candidate whom they already like, Clinton. The former first lady leads in polls in South Carolina, but a win by Obama in one or two of the early votes would give him momentum and directly address the electability question.

Obama's campaign has run ads on gospel radio stations in South Carolina, and he's given speeches at events in the state that clearly evoke the racial significance of his candidacy. It's not something that's a big emphasis in Iowa and New Hampshire, both states with black populations of less than three percent. But in Berlin, New Hampshire earlier this week, he was asked about his views on race relations from a person who noted "I know it doesn't seem appropriate in the whitest place on earth to ask a question."

"I'm not interested in having these conversations about race sort of in the abstract," he said, according to the New York Observer. "When everyone is sort of self-flagellating and saying well are we racist or do we still have discrimination in our society? I don't find those useful. Often times African Americans will get all riled up, a lot of African-Americans will get defensive. It doesn't produce anything. What I want to find is concrete plans for change. And most of the problems that affect African Americans affect everybody."

He said of himself "I'm an African American, but I am somebody, like many African Americans, who has all kinds of stuff in him...You should have seen Thanksgiving, we were like the United Nations...But I self-identify as an African American. That's how I am treated and that's how I am viewed and I'm proud of it."

Iowa voters will soon hear more the racial views of not only Obama, but also the other Democratic candidates, who are attending a forum on minority issues in Des Moines on Saturday.

By Perry Bacon Jr., The Washington Post, November 30, 2007

ROCHESTER, New Hampshire (AFP) - A man claiming to be armed with a bomb took over one of US presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton's campaign offices for more than five hours Friday before surrendering to police.

The man, believed to have a history of mental illness, walked into the New Hampshire office at around 1:00 pm (1800 GMT), taking three women, a man and a baby hostage and reportedly demanding to speak to the former first lady.

Clinton, who was near Washington at the time of the incident, said after the drama ended that the tense standoff had been hard on her and her campaign. "It's been a very difficult day, personally and emotionally," Clinton told reporters, adding that she had been in touch with the families of those being held hostage throughout the day.

"I'm so grateful this day has ended well," said the former first lady, who was due to travel to New Hampshire to thank law enforcement officers.

A young woman initially raised the alarm after fleeing the building with her baby almost immediately after the hostage-taker entered Clinton's office.

Witness Lettie Tzizik told local television station WMUR she spoke to the woman shortly after she fled the building to a nearby shop. "A young woman with a six-month or eight-month-old infant came rushing into the store just in tears, and she said, 'You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape," WMUR quoted her as saying.

Armed police rapidly arrived on the scene, with units setting up across the street while negotiators established communication.

The hostage-taker, named by police as Lee Eisenberg, released another captive around two hours into the standoff before giving up the last two around three hours later.

Live television images showed Eisenberg surrendering to police with his hands in the air before getting down on the ground, being arrested by armed officers and taken to a police vehicle. He was later charged with several offences including kidnapping, police said, adding that the suspected bomb turned out to be several road flares strapped to his body with duct tape.

US media said that Eisenberg was well known locally, had a history of mental problems and wanted to draw attention to the state of psychiatric health care in the United States. He had reportedly been scheduled to appear in court Friday for a domestic violence hearing and had previously spent time in jail. He was also believed to be going through a divorce and reportedly had a history of alcohol abuse.

Sherman Ejarque from The Governor's Inn in Rochester interviewed Eisenberg for a job as a dish washer earlier this year and told AFP the hostage-taker "seemed like a habitually unemployed drifter."

The incident came as campaigning for the 2008 White House race began heating up towards the first nominating contests in Iowa, just five weeks away on January 3, followed by the first primaries in New Hampshire on January 8.

Clinton, who was first lady during her husband Bill Clinton's tenure in the White House 1993-2001, has been riding high in the polls, but she remains a deeply polarizing figure.

A New York senator and a veteran of the fiercely partisan war raging through US politics, she has in the past lambasted a "vast right-wing conspiracy" which she says has targeted her and her husband.

An object of anger since her husband's 1992 White House campaign, she has also provoked the ire of anti-feminists and conservatives, which is being whipped up again as she strives to be America's first woman president.

A USA Today poll in October gave Clinton a 53 percent favorable approval rating, compared to a 44 percent unfavorable rating.

And despite polls showing the race narrowing in key states ahead of the Iowa caucuses on January 3, she still leads nationwide in almost every significant opinion survey of the Democratic field.

AFP, November 30, 2007

The New Republic: Many Fear That A Clinton Nomination Will Hurt Democratic Chances In '08

Even with Barack Obama looking more and more competitive in the fast-approaching Iowa caucuses, Hillary Clinton remains the prohibitive favorite to win the 2008 Democratic nomination. But that hasn't quieted the grumbling - hell, downright speechifying - from some Democrats that if she were to become the nominee, Clinton would drag down Democratic chances in congressional and local elections in ways that neither of her main opponents (Obama and Senator John Edwards) ever could. "If Hillary comes to the state of Missouri, we can write it off," warned Missouri House Minority Whip Connie Johnson, an Edwards supporter, last October. "I'm not sure it would be fatal in Indiana, but she would be a drag," Democratic state Rep. Dave Crooks of nearby Indiana told the AP in August.

While there are plenty of other reasons not to vote for her, concerns about Clinton's down-ballot drag are overwrought. Though she could have a marginal effect on a few races here and there, our electoral system has become so shock-absorbent that presidential candidates barely have a down-ballet effect anymore. In 2004 George W. Bush posted what by today's lights was a solid win, and yet what coattails did he have? The Republicans made no net gain among governors; they added four U.S. senators (their biggest achievement) and a mere four U.S. house seats; and they lost about five dozen state legislative seats overall and net control of four state legislative chambers. Not since Gary Coleman last donned a tuxedo have we seen coattails this short.

Partly, this is a consequence of states holding their elections in non-presidential cycles. Only 11 states elect their governors in presidential years, and in many states, some or all seats in either state legislative chamber are off the ballot. Meanwhile, the increasingly sophisticated gerrymandering of both national and state legislative districts further limits the ability of presidential candidacies to ramify down-ballot. Finally, because straight party-line voting is on the rise, the performance and approval of presidential candidates is less likely to cause partisan defections in other races. So, whether Hillary Clinton is a greater asset or liability than Edwards or Obama is secondary to the fact that neither she nor they are likely to have much effect on their fellow Democratic office-seekers.

Those who warn about "Clinton drag" point to her poll numbers. As Karl Rove noted in his inaugural online column for Newsweek, "For a front-runner in an open race for the presidency, she has the highest negatives in history." But a closer look shows that, on many measures, she fares no worse and often a bit better than Obama and Edwards. Take the latest USA Today/Gallup poll, which shows that her national favorability rating of 52 percent is statistically identical to Obama's 53 percent and John Edwards' 50. Democrats rate her higher in terms of "leadership" ability (88 percent; Obama, 68 percent; Edwards, 64 percent), though Republicans rate her lower (22 percent, 40 percent and 33 percent, respectively). The case against Clinton is usually pegged to her favorable/unfavorable splits. Typical of this trend is the latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, which shows Clinton with a +3 favorable/unfavorable margin (49 percent to 46 percent), compared to Obama at +16 (50 percent to 34 percent) and Edwards at +11 (46 percent to 35 percent).

In short, while Americans view Clinton about as favorably as they do her two chief rivals, Democrats think she is a better leader, Republicans think she'd make a worse leader, and a greater share of voters who do not approve of her actually disapprove of her - which sounds like a redundancy, but is not when you realize that many voters have neither a favorable nor unfavorable view of Obama or Edwards. If either of them wins the nomination, however, don't doubt for a second that the Republican machine can't or won't ratchet up their negatives later.

Still, is there something unique about Clinton that could put other 2008 Democratic candidates at risk? The strongest claim to that is she's an uncommonly unifying figure - for Republicans and the right. So while the intensity of Clinton hatred may not multiply a voter's vote, it could motivate citizens to engage in other ways, such as donating to Republican candidates, walking precincts, or persuading their friends and co-workers to vote against Clinton and other Democrats. Such activities have the potential to alter the composition of the electorate from the one currently being polled - with potentially damaging ramifications for Democratic candidates in close races.

But at the heart of the Clinton drag thesis is the notion, typified by the comments from the Missouri and Indiana Democrats above, that she will disproportionately hurt Democrats running in red states or red areas of blue states. This is in sharp contrast to Obama, who it seems like everyday benefits from a story about his "red state appeal," his ability to draw in people who typically wouldn't vote Democratic. Let's presume for a moment that Clinton would be a drag. What down-ballot races would she likely affect?

Of the 11 gubernatorial races, three Democrats (Montana's Brian Schweitzer, New Hampshire's John Lynch, West Virginia's Joe Manchin) and three Republicans (North Dakota's John Hoeven, Utah's Jon Huntsman, Vermont's Jim Douglas) are safe incumbents likely to be re-elected no matter what. Contests that could be affected include the re-election bids of Washington Democrat Christine Gregoire, Republicans Matt Blunt of Missouri and Mitch Daniels of Indiana, and the race to replace term-limited Democrat Mike Easley in North Carolina. Blunt's head-to-head numbers against expected Democratic nominee Jay Nixon are probably too lousy to matter, but Washington and Indiana are swing states that might be influenced by the presidential campaigns. So, at worst, Clinton could make it slightly tougher for Democrats to re-elect Gregoire, unseat Daniels, and replace Easley. On that latter count, the nomination of Tar Heel native Edwards might be more helpful.

Turning to the Senate, Democrats Jeanne Shaheen and Mark Warner look solid in New Hampshire and Virginia. The races most likely to be affected by presidential politics included two with endangered Republican incumbents (Norm Coleman in Minnesota, Gordon Smith in Oregon), and two where Republican retirements in Colorado and New Mexico have provided Democrats with great pickup opportunities. In the two southwestern open-seat races, Edwards and Obama might be less helpful down-ballot than Clinton, who enjoys strong support among Hispanics. In the other two, Clinton could cause problems for Democrats in culturally conservative northern Minnesota and eastern Oregon, but probably no more so than Obama - the perceived difference between the two is likely quite small among white rural voters. Again, only Edwards might have some positive impact here. As for U.S. House races, though too numerous to discuss in detail, the wave of Republican retirements -- 10 announced so far in Illinois, Ohio, New Jersey and New Mexico alone -- will turn many of the key races into referenda on the quality of the parties' House, not presidential, nominees.

There is one other key factor to consider: Hillary's support among women - the one demographic that is disbursed evenly across almost every precinct, county, and state in the nation - could even make her a down-ballot asset in 2008, especially if she can turn out under-mobilized, unmarried female voters. But the fact is that neither she nor her main rivals will provide a significant drag or lift for Democratic office-seekers. Pantsuits don't have coattails anyway, so perhaps it is appropriate that a woman could become the first major-party presidential nominee at a time when presidential candidates don't pull many fellow partisans into office with them.




By Thomas F. Schaller, The New Republic, November 30, 2007

CONCORD, N.H.-Presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign chief on Friday had a simple message for rival Barack Obama's camp: stop running a misleading television ad.

Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle sent the letter to her counterpart, David Plouffe, and told him the ad contains incorrect information about Obama's health care plan. The ad claims Obama's plan would provide insurance for everyone, but critics say the Illinois Democrat's plan would leave 15 million people without insurance.

"On an issue of this magnitude, Americans are looking for more than a nice ad or a good speech. It's not enough for Sen. Obama to say he covers everyone, especially when that is inaccurate," Solis Doyle wrote. "Until the time comes when Sen. Obama has a plan that will cover everyone, you should stop running this false advertisement. The American people deserve an honest debate about health care."

Obama's campaign said it doesn't plan to take down the ad that has been running for weeks in Iowa. Polls there show a tight contest between Clinton, Obama and John Edwards. The ad went on the air in New Hampshire this week.

"The Clinton campaign didn't say a word when this ad was released a month ago, and the only thing that's changed since then is the poll numbers," Obama spokesman Reid Cherlin said in a statement. "Rather than spending their time attacking Barack Obama, the Clinton campaign should explain how exactly they plan to force every American to buy health insurance even if they can't afford it."

Solis Doyle's letter on Friday also said Obama hasn't even been consistent in describing his plan. "Your advertisement not only contradicts the judgment of health care experts, but public statements by your campaign and your candidate. Sen. Obama has pledged to put 'honesty first' in this campaign," she writes.

"Even Sen. Obama himself has admitted that his plan would not cover everyone, calling the plan 'virtually universal.'"

Obama, hoping to parry the ongoing dispute, told reporters in a conference call earlier this week that Clinton was making "more of a political point" than anything else. He said that while her plan nominally requires coverage for all, "she hasn't told anybody how she would enforce this mandate."

During a conference call with reporters, Clinton policy director Neera Tanden said a mandate is the only way to guarantee universal coverage. She said anyone who seeks emergency room treatment or has contact with government agencies -- such as paying taxes -- would be automatically enrolled. "She'd look at other steps as well: working with employers to automatically enroll employees, going through and withholding part of their salaries to pay for it -- those are reasonable steps to enforce a mandate," she said.

By Philip Elliot, Associated Press, November 30, 2007

NEW YORK (Reuters) - After more than a year of political campaigning and tens of millions of dollars raised and spent, some experts believe the contests to choose the Democratic and Republican nominees for U.S. president could be over in a mere five days.

The first political caucus in Iowa on January 3 and the first primary in New Hampshire on January 8 could produce the nominee for each party, leaving millions of voters headed to nominating contests later in the spring with the nominees already effectively chosen, they say.

If so, the longest U.S. presidential nominating season ever -- one that began two years before the November 2008 election -- could wrap up in the shortest time ever.

"My opinion is that whoever wins Iowa on the Democratic side will probably be the nominee, and whoever wins New Hampshire on the Republican side will probably be the nominee," said Mark McKinnon, media adviser to Republican candidate Sen. John McCain. McKinnon spoke at a panel discussion on Thursday on the Internet's impact on the presidential race. "There won't be time," he said, "for candidates to come back or rebuild after losing early primary states."

Compressing the selection process is the short gap between the caucus in Iowa, the first state battle to choose the Democratic and Republican candidates for the November 2008 election, and the primary in New Hampshire five days later. The two typically have been eight days apart or more.

A win in Iowa and New Hampshire can create momentum for later contests, while a loss can mean collapse of a campaign.

Others dismiss that argument, including Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.

She argued that demographics of various states -- roughly half of the 50 U.S. states will hold nominating contests as of February 5 -- are so diverse that candidates with money would stay in the race to reach a primary where they have support. Largely white, rural Iowa and New Hampshire are far different from states later in the nominating calendar, she said.

For example, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is almost certain to stay in the race until the January 29 primary in the more diverse and delegate-rich Florida, where he has support and has campaigned heavily, she said.

"You've got one day when 40 percent of the (nominating) delegates are decided. Anybody who drops out of the race whose got the money to compete is a fool," Jamieson said.

WINNING SCENARIOS

But plenty of scenarios showing nominations decided by Iowa and New Hampshire exist, experts say, especially if the same candidate wins both states.

Among Democrats, said Dante Scala, political science professor at the University of New Hampshire, if New York Sen. Hillary Clinton or Illinois Sen. Barack Obama wins both early states, "the race for the nomination is essentially over."

Among Republicans, a split with different candidates winning Iowa and New Hampshire is more likely and could stretch the race into January or February, he said.

Jennifer Donahue, political analyst at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, agreed that the nominations could be sewn up in less than a week if front-runners win both early contests but noted the strong possibility of other outcomes.

"If a front-runner goes two-for-two, it's over," she said, yet a scenario such as a surprise victory by former Republican Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Iowa could weaken support for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in New Hampshire and extend the contest for the Republican nomination.

"These are all possible scenarios," she said. "If any of us could really predict which scenario is going to occur, we would probably be either extremely wealthy or running the country."

By Ellen Wulfhorst, Reuters, November 30, 2007

SEN. Joe Biden's long-shot campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination has been hyping a new poll that shows him faring as well as any other Democrat against the various likely Republican nominees. Problem is, this isn't so much good news for Biden as it is a wake-up call for the Democratic Party - and whoever does win its nomination.

And it's not one poll, but many: As in 2004, "Democrat to be named later" does well in matchups against a similarly generic GOP nominee. But once you insert actual names, the race tightens. Nationally, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards find themselves in a dead heat against John McCain and Rudy Giuliani (with a slight edge over Mitt Romney).

That's troubling for Democrats, who couldn't ask for a more hospitable electoral environment. The public is fed up with Republicans; the top Dem candidates boast astronomical name-ID and Democrats are trampling the GOP in fund-raising. The lackluster GOP field has devolved into The Bickersons, with a slew of flawed candidates who've left Republican voters frustrated and underwhelmed.

So why the dead heat? It can't help that the Democratic race is looking a bit like another contest whose contenders will do almost anything to win: the Miss Puerto Rico pageant.

No one's pepper-sprayed Clinton's pantsuit or spiked Obama's foundation, but the front-runners have abandoned the patina of party unity. Obama drips with sarcasm when challenging his chief rival, Clinton; she, in turn, barely acknowledges his existence when they're on stage together. Edwards just fumes.

Which brings us back to Biden. He just released a Web video, "Joe is Right," highlighting heaps of praise from the top-tier candidates. Compliments come easy when nobody thinks you're a threat.

Biden has done admirably in the debates, maximizing the crumbs of time doled out to second-tier candidates and steering clear of his signature gaffes. (He even got off a perfect one-liner on Giuliani: "There's only three things he mentions in a sentence - a noun, a verb, and 9/11.") In short, he's set a good example of what a strong general-election candidate might look like.

Meanwhile, the top three candidates have managed to highlight many of their negative qualities with increasing precision.

Obama represents change and hope, but is full of airy rhetoric. Clinton represents experience, but many voters think she panders and don't trust her. Edwards wants change, too - but has abandoned his sunny optimism of 2004 and sounds more fiery activist than president with his obsession with "shaking up Washington." They could do worse than to learn from Biden.

People may flock to hear Obama's soaring oratory, but when push comes to shove, voters are far more concerned about their day-to-day lives than they'll ever be about "uniting the country." Biden steers clear of platitudes and talks frankly about what he'd do, and has done, to better American lives in a tangible way.

It's hard to imagine Biden getting tangled up over driver's licenses for illegal immigrants as Clinton did, reinforcing voters' fear that she says what she thinks people want to hear. When the left formed an angry mob demanding that Democrats vote against the emergency supplemental bill for Iraq , Biden voted for it - making no excuses for wanting to protect US soldiers in combat.

Biden is tough, but he knows that Americans have tired of the gratuitous battling that has become Edwards' signature. Instead, he highlights his ability to bring people together and work across party lines, most recently on an Iraq resolution that garnered 75 votes, including 26 Republicans.

Chances are slim that Biden could Huckabee himself into the first tier. But as his fellow Democrats offer him praise, they should recall that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

By Kirsten Powers, New York Post, November 30, 2007

Caucusgoers beware: It's roughly a month away from the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, and the political shenanigans are in high gear.

Such tactics by people who play dirty have moved beyond the destruction of yard signs or push polls that ply caucusgoers with misleading or inaccurate information.

This time, they've taken to the Internet in the form of e-mail accounts made to look like they were sent from campaign officials.

The latest was an e-mail that was sent this week, using the name of a field director for Republican Mitt Romney's campaign and telling voters that one of Rudy Giuliani's advisers is a "pedophile priest." The e-mail directed voters to a blog item on InsideCatholic.com about Monsignor Alan Placa, a longtime friend of Giuliani's. Placa, who officiated at Giuliani's second wedding and works in his consulting firm, has been accused of molesting two boys in New York.

Giuliani has defended his friend as recently as last month. "We give some of the worst people in our society the presumption of innocence and benefit of the doubt," Giuliani said in Milwaukee, Wis. "And, of course, I'm going to give that to one of my closest friends."

The e-mail came from an Internet account with David Overholtzer's name. Overholtzer, the Romney supporter, vehemently denied involvement.

Such accounts can be set up by virtually anybody with Internet access. "It's a fabrication. The whole thing is," said Overholtzer, who is also co-chairman of the Pottawattamie County Republicans. "The whole thing is a lie."

Arthur Sanders, a Drake political science professor, cautioned Iowans to think twice before taking such e-mails as fact. "There are a lot of dirty tricks that campaigns use, and the Web makes it easier," Sanders said. He noted that it's almost a given that campaigns will deny involvement and, unless they are directly caught, the undercurrent of such attacks can linger and erode voter confidence. "We know they're going to say they're not involved, whether they are or not," Sanders said. "It doesn't put the rumors to rest," he added.

Paul Pate, the chairman for Giuliani's Iowa campaign, called the e-mail "dirty." "These kind of dirty tactics have no place in the political discourse," Pate said.

Other recent rumors or offensive tactics have also attracted headlines.

Earlier this month conservative columnist Robert Novak said in his nationally syndicated column that "agents" of Hillary Clinton campaign were "spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information" about Barack Obama, her chief Democratic presidential rival. Clinton's campaign dismissed the assertion as a "Republican-leaning journalist" running "a blind item designed to set Democrats against one another."

Earlier this week, a hand-written campaign flier found in Ames, Slater and Ankeny advised caucusgoers to vote for John Edwards and referred to Clinton and Obama in abusive language.

Campaign officials for Edwards' campaign called the sign disgusting.

"You have to be careful and you need to be skeptical of claims that are made, particularly those who are attacking something about someone on the other side," Sanders said.

By Jason Clayworth, Des Moines Register, November 30, 2007

John Edwards tells voters that there are still two Americas. What Iowa caucusgoers must decide is if there are two John Edwardses.

Four years ago, the fresh-faced then-North Carolina senator defended his support for the Iraq war, prescribed a gradual approach to health care reform and told Iowa caucusgoers not to expect him to criticize his fellow Democrats running for president.

Today, he calls his Iraq vote a mistake, embraces universal health care and regularly attacks party front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.

Edwards says the changes are the natural consequence of his persistent outrage with the influence of moneyed interests, but some Iowa Democrats and party strategists view them as politically calculated.

A glaring difference between Edwards' two campaigns is the expectation he faces this time in Iowa's leadoff caucuses. His success in 2004, when he finished in second place in Iowa, and his nonstop effort since then put pressure on him to do well again.

At its core, Edwards' message of fairness is the same in his 2008 campaign it was in 2004, scholars and political observers say. However, it is sharper and more confrontational, reflecting the increased urgency felt by Democratic voters to reverse course, and the pressure on the candidate to remain relevant in an altered political environment.

"I think it's the same core message, adapted to a different mood and a different time," said E.J. Dionne, a scholar with the Brookings Institution.

Claims consistency

Edwards rejects the suggestion that he recanted his vote for the 2002 resolution to authorize military action in Iraq and now embraces universal health care as moves choreographed to endear him with his party's left in 2008. Instead, he insists the positions are consistent with his 2004 campaign's message of countering unfairness. But rather than targeting the Bush administration, he has trained his assault on corporate interests.

"Anybody who's really been watching for the whole time and is thinking about it would see there's a very clear pattern to this," Edwards said in a Des Moines Register interview. "If you were to sort of sum it up, what I would say is in 2004, I talked about two Americas. In 2008, I'm talking about taking on the fight and the substance necessary to create one America."

Edwards is referring to the metaphor that fueled his late Iowa surge and second-place caucus finish in 2004. In a Des Moines speech in late December 2003, he condemned the notion of "one America that does the work and another that reaps the reward."

Four years later, Edwards continues to discuss his upbringing in a North Carolina textile mill town. But he is far more specific in discussing his policy proposals. He describes himself as more seasoned, having run once before on his own and as John Kerry's vice presidential running mate in 2004.

He has adopted a more casual dress code as he campaigns in Iowa - faded blue jeans vs. the dress pants of four years ago. But Edwards is more combative this time around. He is no longer content to talk about economic inequity - he prescribes an aggressive effort to root out special interests in Washington, D.C. "It is time to give these entrenched interests, that are standing against America, hell," Edwards told thousands of Iowa Democrats this month at the state party's fall fundraiser in Des Moines. "That's the only way we're going to win this fight."

Growing discontent

Eric Johnson, an undecided Democrat from Iowa City, said the changes he sees in Edwards seem to have mirrored the growing discontent of Democrats, and voters in general, since the 2004 election.

For example, Americans were evenly divided about four years ago about President Bush's handling of the Iraq war, which was then less than a year under way. Today, polls show nearly two-thirds of Americans disapprove of it.

The narrow majority of Americans who believed it was the federal government's responsibility to make sure people have health insurance has grown in the past four years to roughly two-thirds.

"The political climate is more open to solutions that might have been deemed politically unpalatable," said Johnson, a University of Iowa graduate student who is considering supporting Edwards in the caucuses. "I'm glad to see him taking advantage of that climate. I'm glad to see what I see as an evolution in his thinking."

Edwards readily says he was a more careful candidate in 2004. And while he dismisses the idea that he has lurched to the left out of political expedience, he contends that the issues that dominated the 2004 campaign now warrant bolder solutions.

"Health care has become a much graver crisis, for instance," said Joe Trippi, a senior adviser to Edwards. "The divide between the two Americas has gotten wider."

Trippi embodies a difference in Edwards' two campaigns. He managed the 2004 campaign of Howard Dean, who at times lumped Edwards in with "Washington politicians" whom the former Vermont governor accused of bending to Bush. Edwards left the Senate in 2005 after his only term.

Some national Democratic strategists say caucusgoers may view Edwards' change in position and tone as part of a tactical shift to appeal to the party's increasingly angry left in the presidential campaign.

"So the struggle for John Edwards becomes one of authenticity," said Erik Smith, a top aide to 2004 Democratic candidate Dick Gephardt's campaign.

"And if Iowa caucusgoers believe this transformation is an authentic one, then he'll be OK. If caucusgoers believe it is opportunistic, and political, he won't.

The stakes in Iowa are higher for Edwards in 2008. He finished within striking distance of Kerry, the 2004 caucus winner, and was the early leader in Iowa polls this cycle. That cushion has eroded and he now narrowly trails Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Retains loyalty

However, he retains the loyalty of many of his 2004 supporters. He has been endorsed by 10 state legislators, including most of the five who endorsed him four years ago.

Bonnie Crawford, a Tama County Edwards supporter from 2004 who plans to caucus for the candidate in January, described the differences between his first and second campaigns as evolutionary. "These are all improvements that show his growth," said Crawford, a Toledo Democrat. "Last time, he had the same passion, but he played it safer."

Edwards dismisses the idea that his persistent criticism of Clinton marks a retreat from his 2004 campaign mantra to refrain from attacking his opponents. He has repeatedly faulted Clinton for not prescribing a detailed plan for ending the war in Iraq. He has proposed immediately withdrawing at least 40,000 troops and having all combat troops out within 10 months.

Dionne said Edwards' other criticism of Clinton, that her acceptance of campaign contributions from federal lobbyists ties her to special interests, does not come solely out of political necessity.

"I think it strengthens the forcefulness of his challenge to the status quo in Washington," Dionne said.

By Thomas Beaumont, Des Moines Register, November 30, 2007

CONCORD, N.H. - With Hillary Clinton faltering in polls leading up to the Iowa caucuses, the New Hampshire primary is looming as a possible make-or-break moment for her - in a place where she has most of the party's key endorsements and a sizable lead in the polls, but where a defeat could be devastating.

Unlike in Iowa, where the major endorsements are split among several candidates, Clinton has the support of most of the Democratic party establishment in New Hampshire. She has other important advantages here that she lacks in Iowa, including a history of campaigning for her husband and New Hampshire's recent tradition of electing female politicians.

However, her lead in the New Hampshire polls has narrowed in the last month, and analysts say her enviable organization does not guarantee protection against the wave of momentum that could propel Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, if he were to win the Iowa caucuses, which are five days before the Jan. 8 primary.

Because of New Hampshire's traditional influence and the high expectations generated by Clinton's mass of endorsements here, analysts say, she could not lose both Iowa and New Hampshire and survive in the race.

"I would argue that New Hampshire is the firewall of last resort," said Dante Scala, a University of New Hampshire political scientist. "New Hampshire has to come through for her if Iowa doesn't."

Clinton's campaign expresses confidence about her performance around the country, including in both the crucial early states. But it has also flooded Iowa with new staff in the days since her poll numbers began dropping, and Clinton is expected to spend much of December traveling the state.

There is also a growing sense of urgency among the New York senator's Granite State ranks. The New Hampshire campaign recently opened several field offices and hired staff to bring the total in the state to about 100. "We need you to step it up now, we need you to turn up the heat now," New Hampshire's speaker of the House, Terie Norelli, told a crowd of prominent supporters gathered in Concord to see Clinton on Monday. "We need you not just to do one phone bank, but to do many phone banks. We need you to talk to your neighbors, we need you to write letters to the editor."

Each week, hundreds of campaign volunteers knock on an average of 25,000 doors statewide, and they have made close to a million phone calls seeking and solidifying support from voters, according to Clinton's New Hampshire state director, Nick Clemons.

But Obama's campaign has also stepped up its efforts and is preparing for a showdown as well. Obama's campaign said it has kept pace with Clinton's in paid staff and its volunteers are just as busy knocking on doors, making phone calls, and writing postcards. Obama spokeswoman Leslie Miller, who said the campaign knocks on 20,000 doors a week, questioned the Clinton figures, saying Obama canvassers rarely run into their Clinton counterparts.

But outside political observers say Clinton's campaign is more agile, thanks to her backing from members of the local party establishment, who are better-schooled in what it takes to win the first-in-the-nation primarily.

The state's two leading Democrats, Governor John Lynch and former governor and current senatorial candidate Jeanne Shaheen, are staying neutral in the race, but their spouses have endorsed Clinton, which analysts see as a clear sign that their political organizations will be supporting her. In addition to Norelli, Clinton has the backing of the state Senate president, the state party chairwoman who led the Democrats to victory in 2006, and most of New Hampshire's top political operatives.

It is unusual but not unprecedented for so much of the Democratic muscle in New Hampshire to coalesce around one person in a primary without an incumbent. In 2000, Vice President Al Gore had the backing of most of the party establishment, and eked out a four-point win against Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey. His victory was enough to seize the momentum going into larger states, and he won the nomination with ease. Some Obama supporters point to Bradley's close finish, even without the momentum of a win in the Iowa caucuses, as evidence that establishment backing does not erase all vulnerabilities.

Obama's biggest endorsement is from freshman US Representative Paul Hodes; the only other Democratic member of Congress from New Hampshire is neutral. But Obama's supporters say it is natural that Clinton would monopolize the endorsements. "The reality is that Barack Obama has been on the scene for 10 months running against the most powerful Democratic political force for two decades, the Clintons," said Obama cochairman Ned Helms. "They were busy all spring and summer courting the names you would recognize, at the same time we were engaging people . . . on 'what are your passions?' "

Helms said people do not enter the voting booth pondering whom their state representative has endorsed, especially the independent voters who make up a large chunk of the state's electorate. But the support of a broad swatch of the party's elected leadership will translate into on-the-ground organizational support on primary day. And Clinton's supporters say the endorsers have been working hard in all facets of the campaign.

Senate President Sylvia Larsen recently brought a crock-pot full of homemade chili to Clinton's Manchester headquarters, while Kathy Sullivan, the former state party chairwoman, cooked pasta for a volunteer potluck. "People will say, 'Oh, the establishment is for Hillary Clinton,' but people forget that the establishment is the people who have been making the chili and the pasta for years," Sullivan said, referring to herself and Larsen.

New Hampshire is considered friendlier territory than Iowa for Clinton for several reasons. She spent a lot of time campaigning for her husband in 1992 while bypassing Iowa because home-state Senator Tom Harkin was running. Women are unusually prominent in New Hampshire politics, perhaps because its part-time Legislature has attracted female candidates for decades.

Clinton has maintained a clear lead in polls, though recent ones have gotten tighter. A CNN/WMUR poll in September put her ahead of Obama by 43 percent to 20 percent. In a Suffolk University/WHDH poll this week, she led him 34 percent to 22 percent.

And the results of the Iowa caucus could significantly influence the New Hampshire primary, said Mark Mellman, a veteran Democratic strategist who is not affiliated with a campaign. An Iowa victory by former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who is vying with Clinton and Obama for the lead in some Iowa polls, would not translate much in New Hampshire, where Edwards fared very poorly in 2004, Mellman said. But if Obama won Iowa, there would be a flood of positive press about him and questions about whether Clinton is electable. "It's unfair and inaccurate, but it would be a lot of chaff to have to navigate through in five days," he said.

If Obama wins Iowa, Scala said, Clinton's imperative will be to hold on to college-educated, professional women, among whom she has done surprisingly well, considering that Obama's idealistic campaign is attractive to their demographic.

"If they stick with her, her firewall will hold up," Scala said. "But if not, it will be five sleepless nights for the Clinton campaign. Actually, it will be five sleepless nights no matter what."

By Marcella Bombardieri, The Boston Globe, November 30, 2007

A wise man once said it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven - and it used to be nearly as tough for a Democratic candidate to take a presidential campaign to a conservative evangelical church.

But Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did just that Thursday with a visit to one of the country's most influential megachurches that dramatized the new Democratic efforts to win support from evangelical voters that the party once considered out of reach.

Clinton received a standing ovation from a full house at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest at the annual Global Summit on AIDS and the Church hosted by the Rev. Rick Warren and his wife, Kay. Warren, a youthful, bearded, blue-jeans-wearing pastor who hails from San Jose, is the author of "A Purpose Driven Life" - which has sold more than 23 million copies and ranks as one of the best-selling nonfiction books in history. The church that he and his wife lead attracts as many as 20,000 attendees to its diverse Sunday services - gospel, traditional, "worship rock," Polynesian and singles among them.

Last year, Warren welcomed Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois to the stage at Saddleback, and this year, the minister invited all the presidential candidates in both parties to address his congregation on the HIV pandemic. With just five weeks until voting begins in the presidential nominating contest, only Clinton came in person; Republicans Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Mitt Romney and Democrats Obama and John Edwards addressed the congregation through videos.

Clinton delivered an unusually personal, often emotional speech that quoted regularly from Scripture and explored issues including her religious experiences. "I was fortunate enough to be raised to understand the power and the purpose of prayer ... but had I not been, probably one week in the White House would have turned me into one," she said to laughs.

Clinton said that in her most difficult times, there was a White House prayer group "whose love and support sustained me."

But Clinton told the audience of about 1,700 people that action goes hand in hand with faith. She won applause when she proposed $50 billion for AIDS treatment and prevention and promised to "set a goal of ending all deaths from malaria in Africa" - where 1 million die annually from the disease - by the end of a second term.

The Democratic candidate did not shy away from more controversial ground, telling congregants "it is long past time that we do everything we can to stand up for the proposition that women's rights are human rights."

"Girls denied their human rights are girls at risk for AIDS. ... Even in our own country today, women are now the face of AIDS," she said, arguing that world and church leaders must address the sexual trafficking of girls worldwide.

The visit by the Democratic front-runner to the Orange County megachurch highlighted a changing political strategy among Democrats. National Party Chairman Howard Dean, who once dismissed Republicans as a "white Christian party," has more recently urged Democrats to open their arms to young evangelicals and a new generation of religious leaders such as Warren.

Burns Strider, the national director of faith-based outreach for the Clinton campaign, said the New York senator - a United Methodist - relished the opportunity to "join with people of faith" to talk about fighting AIDS. He said Clinton believes that Democrats "have got to find a common ground" with millions of evangelical voters - a widely diverse, engaged constituency.

"Younger leaders are opening the door ... and we welcome the dialogue," Strider said.

Religious scholars said such efforts could change the parameters of a once-predictable political strategy: Democrats aiming for dominance in urban African American churches with the help of politically liberal leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton and Republicans courting conservative white evangelicals with televangelists such as Pat Robertson and the now-deceased Jerry Falwell.

Now there is a fertile new middle ground to be plowed in churches such as Saddleback, whose leaders like Warren eschew divisive partisan talk and political wedge issues. Instead, they "emphasize much less the notion of a vengeful, judgmental God," said Mathew Schmalz, professor of religious studies at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass.

The approach has proved successful in appealing to millions who want religious experiences that "emphasize the Bible and teachings of Jesus as a blueprint for living, a guide for living a full and healthy life," he said. That has forged a new evangelical profile which "is becoming more diverse ... interested in more socially progressive issues" such as poverty, illiteracy, the AIDS epidemic in Africa and the violence in Darfur.

Churches such as Saddleback now offer Christian families "a sense of community and Bible-based truth, but they apply it more flexibly," Schmalz said. "They are people who are more upwardly mobile, urban professional types who don't necessarily live within a traditional evangelical homeschooling world."

GOP consultant Patrick Dorinson said California is particularly important for the new political constituency of these evangelicals. "This is a new movement that has come into the suburbs," Dorinson said. "They want spirituality in their lives, and they got kids, and they want an anchor. They join these churches to be uplifted ... and they don't want to be told who to hate. "You'll see a fight for these voters," he said. "And for Hillary to go is a smart political move."

California Democratic political strategist Garry South - raised as a devout evangelical by churchgoing parents in rural Montana - said that in 2008, Clinton and his party's candidates appear to have acknowledged that "if we don't engage these voters, we deserve to lose."

South noted that churchgoing Americans were historically a Democratic-leaning, working-class demographic "whose dads remembered FDR" and whose main concerns were fiscal: "trying to feed a family, get a better job and get their kids into college."

But powerful lobbying groups such as the Christian Coalition and leaders such as Falwell and Robertson gained clout and took a direct role in GOP politics in the 1980s and 1990s, firing up religious voters on explosive issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.

"They wanted to peel (evangelicals) away to the Republicans ... and the strategy largely worked," he said.

Clinton, in her talk at Saddleback, told the audience of what she said was one of her favorite Scriptural passages, "the line from James: 'Faith without works is dead.' "

"Here, in what you're doing, faith and works come together - and you understand that," she said. "And what extraordinary, important work your faith supports."

A Saddleback Church congregant, Tonie Kennedy, said after the speech that Clinton's venture to the evangelical congregation "was a good decision."

"It shows me she has her own faith," Kennedy said, "and that she has an interest in what's going on in the churches."

Clinton is competing with fellow Democrats Obama and Edwards to expand their bases to include these "values voters" found in churches such as Saddleback.

"Sen. Clinton has the boldness to broaden her base ... it shows she's done her homework and she's open to new ideas," said Vivian Berryhill, president and founder of the National Coalition of Pastors' Spouses, one of the groups courted by Clinton's campaign.

"We're very religious in this country, and these are the people who helped elect (Republican President) Bush," said Berryhill, motioning around at the convention-center-size Saddleback worship hall. "So for her to come here is a gutsy move."

By Carla Marinucci, San Francisco Chronicle, November 30, 2007

Reporters Following Hillary Clinton on the Campaign Trail Are Covered in Dust

CONCORD, N.H. -- ABC correspondent Kate Snow was ready to push through the crowd and ask Hillary Clinton a question until an aide blocked the path of Snow's sound man as he aimed his boom mike in the senator's direction. "Sorry, we've gotta go," the woman said, though it was clear that Clinton would be shaking hands for some time.

Moments later, as the Democratic presidential candidate was mobbed by well-wishers, Boston television reporter Joe Battenfeld managed to shout a question -- a meaningless question, truth be told -- about whether she needed to win both Iowa and New Hampshire. Clinton was defiantly bland in response, as if determined that her comments not be used.

"Oh, I don't think about it like that. I'm just thrilled to be competing in Iowa and New Hampshire... There's something very special about the New Hampshire primary... I take nothing for granted... We have wonderful candidates running."

Such is life spent trailing the Clinton juggernaut, where reporters can generally get close enough to watch but no further, as if separated from the candidate by an invisible sheet of glass.

National correspondents are increasingly frustrated by a lack of access to Clinton. They spend much of their time in rental cars chasing her from one event to the next, because the campaign usually provides no press bus or van. Life on the bus means journalists don't have to worry about luggage or directions or getting left behind, since they are part of the official motorcade. News organizations foot the bill for such transportation, but campaigns have to staff and coordinate the buses -- and deal with the constant presence of their chroniclers.

With rare exceptions -- John McCain chats endlessly with reporters aboard his bus -- leading presidential candidates take a wary approach to the press, doling out access in carefully limited increments. Journalists sometimes question whether it is worth the time and energy to trail politicians who rarely engage them. In this regard, Clinton differs only in her degree of discipline, honed during eight years of often testy media relations in her husband's White House.

Clinton blames an overtaxed schedule for the arm's-length approach, but something more fundamental is at work here. She, like her rivals, wants to deliver a daily message, usually framed around some policy prescription, while reporters want to ask her about the latest polls, tactics or blast from Barack Obama or John Edwards. And answering questions off the cuff always risks the possibility of a blunder, as when Clinton told NBC's Andrea Mitchell during the 1992 campaign that she had chosen to pursue a career rather than stay home and "bake cookies."

At the same time, much of what Clinton wants to communicate -- the nuances of her health-care plan, for instance -- doesn't fit the media's cramped definition of news.

Clinton did a phone interview this week with the Chicago Tribune and a previously scheduled feature interview with The Washington Post, which included a question on her husband's claim that he had opposed the Iraq war from the beginning. But such opportunities are relatively rare. Obama, for his part, held a conference call with reporters Wednesday.

Clinton aides say they try to stage a "press avail," or brief news conference, every five or six days, but they acknowledge the schedule often slips. (Obama is also on a weekly schedule; Edwards, third in the national polls, is more accessible.) The result is little red meat for the press pack. In fact, much of the chatter among the reporters is about MapQuest and GPS devices and Hertz's NeverLost technology as they trade tips on how to track their constantly moving quarry.

Earlier this month, Snow ignored the speed limit as she chased Clinton from a Manchester diner to a Concord state office where the candidate was filing to run in the primary. "I parked seven blocks away," Snow says. "I ran up the street in my high-heel boots. I got there out of breath, and the Secret Service stopped me and said, 'You can't come in.' "

Snow and other late-arriving reporters talked their way in through the back door, but the room was so packed with supporters that her crew couldn't get near the former first lady, whose news conference was almost over. "We're constantly playing catch-up," Snow says.

Newsweek's Andrew Romano says the press didn't even get to take the tour when Clinton visited a Las Vegas sheet-metal factory. "The way we were herded into a small area to watch her walk into a room and meet with union officials just seemed slightly absurd," he says. When a colleague asked the staff for a chance to question Clinton, "they just kind of laughed it off."

My day-long pursuit of the senator on Monday was typical. She arrived more than an hour late, from Iowa, at a 19th-century Victorian mansion here and spoke for all of nine minutes about the importance of health care. With half a dozen cameras rolling, Clinton accepted the endorsement of pediatrician Susan Lynch, wife of the state's Democratic governor, John Lynch.

When Clinton stepped away from the microphones, Bruce Springsteen's "The Rising" began blaring from the speakers, which effectively drowned out any attempted queries from the journalists sprinkled throughout the room. Battenfeld, the Boston reporter, launched his horse-race question during a brief lull between songs.

"It's kind of an art form," he said afterward. "I would have asked her about Obama, but I figured she would have turned and run."

While candidates operate in something of a bubble, their headquarters staff conducts an outside game with tougher language, and Clinton is no exception. As reporters awaited her arrival here, an e-mail arrived by BlackBerry, sparked by a Washington Post report on Obama using a political action committee to make donations to officials in early primary states. "It was surprising to learn that he has been using his PAC in a manner that appears to be inconsistent with the prevailing election laws," the Clinton release said.

After the Concord event, Clinton retreated to a previously scheduled taping with Katie Couric, her only sustained encounter that day with the national media. The CBS anchor asked how disappointed she would be if she isn't the nominee. "Well, it will be me," Clinton said. When Couric pressed, Clinton insisted -- not terribly convincingly -- that she hadn't even considered the possibility she could lose.

Reporters, meanwhile, were making their way along unmarked back roads, past moose crossings and flocks of geese, to find a home on an isolated cul-de-sac in Goffstown. There, Judy Lanza, a nurse, and her husband, Joe, a retired police officer, hosted Clinton in a small kitchen adorned with pumpkins, apple baskets, a cookie jar and a straw doll affixed to the wall.

For more than an hour, 30 journalists watched from the small, darkened living room as Clinton chatted, awkwardly at first, with the five preselected guests. Her rhetoric against health insurance companies was harsher than might have been expected. They give patients the "runaround," deny care, "slow-walk" the payment of bills, she declared. "This is all part of their business model. This is how they make money. . . . The small-business health-care market is really rigged."

From there, Clinton drifted into special education, meetings she had as first lady on religious tolerance, how she was "deeply involved" in the Northern Ireland peace process, and her plans for a "post-Kyoto agreement" on global warming. But although the meeting was staged for the assembled journalists, there was no chance for follow-up, and the event received virtually no coverage.

As Clinton made her way to the door, she observed: "All this good food -- can we feed the press?" But the press was feeling undernourished.

Campaigns often brush off national correspondents in favor of local journalists, who tend to be less critical. Clinton did hold an off-the-record session with New Hampshire reporters and spoke to an Exeter radio station on Monday. But she paid a price for her limited interaction with reporters on the 6 p.m. newscast of WMUR-TV, the state's only network affiliate.

Obama, in New Hampshire that day, was shown talking to one of the station's reporters about Oprah Winfrey's decision to campaign for him. Edwards, also in New Hampshire, was seen talking to reporters about the need for a candidate who "tells the truth." But Clinton's endorsement by the governor's wife warranted only a brief mention, with no sound bite from the candidate.

Her last major event was a potluck dinner at a cavernous union hall in the town of Brentwood. But only a handful of reporters attended and I arrived late, driving down unlighted streets in a heavy rain as confused Clinton aides kept giving me the wrong directions.

The candidate spent half an hour signing campaign posters and posing for pictures, and I persuaded her tired-looking staff to grant me a single question as she made her way out. The question: Wouldn't providing more media access help get her message out?

"We try to balance what we do every day," Clinton said. "I'm trying to reach as many voters as possible one-on-one" while also dealing with the local press, "which has a very big role to play," and making time for occasional interviews with national news outlets. "It seems I have mushrooming demands," she said. "The balancing is really intense."

With that, she was off to a waiting plane to South Carolina, while reporters headed for commercial flights to follow her there.

By Howard Kurtz, The Washington Post, November 30, 2007

LANSING, Mich. - At first glance, Hillary Rodham Clinton should easily win Michigan's Democratic primary, since no other top candidates are on the ballot.

But she faces an unusual opponent: "Uncommitted."

If enough backers of the candidates who aren't on the ballot - Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden - mark "Uncommitted" when they vote Jan. 15, it could take some of the luster off what's otherwise a certain Clinton victory.

"We will see if over the next two or three weeks the people who aren't on the ballot ... urge everyone to vote 'uncommitted.' I think that's an intriguing prospect," said Democratic activist Bob Alexander of East Lansing, Mich. "It would get a lot of national attention."

The four withdrew their names from the Michigan ballot to satisfy Iowa and New Hampshire, which were unhappy Michigan was challenging their leadoff status in the primary calendar.

Despite last-ditch legislative efforts to put the four missing Democrats back on the ballot, Clinton will be up against only Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel.

A poll conducted earlier this month by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA showed 49 percent of likely Democratic voters back Clinton. But 18 percent support Obama, 15 percent prefer Edwards and 12 percent are undecided, leaving a potentially large pool of uncommitted voters who could muddy the perception of a Clinton victory.

Under Alexander's scenario, backers of Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden would get some of the uncommitted slots when Michigan Democrats hold district conventions in late March to choose 83 of their 156 national convention delegates.

He hopes a few might even go to Al Gore supporters, even though the former vice president isn't running and Alexander was unsuccessful in getting him on the Michigan ballot.

But seats will be set aside for uncommitted delegates at district conventions only if at least 15 percent of voters in the Democratic primary in that congressional district chose uncommitted, or if at least 15 percent of Democratic voters statewide choose uncommitted.

If enough Michigan Democrats vote "uncommitted," it could slow some of Clinton's momentum if she does well in the earlier Iowa and New Hampshire contests. If she has done poorly until that point, the disaffection with her candidacy shown by uncommitted Michigan Democratic voters could harm her even further.

So far, the Clinton campaign doesn't seem too worried. A spokesman declined to comment on the possibility of "uncommitted" doing well.

By Kathy Barks Hoffman, Associated Press, November 29, 2007

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton says young women today have it tougher in some ways than they did more than four decades ago when she was growing up.

There are so many competing messages now like 'You're not thin enough' or 'You're not sexy enough.' It's overwhelming," Clinton said. "And very young girls spend time absorbing these messages from TV or music videos instead of just going out and playing."

The Democratic presidential hopeful answered questions from members of iVillage.com. The Web site posted her responses Thursday, along with a slideshow of photographs from her life.

Clinton, 60, described what she was like as a teenager when watching "The Ed Sullivan Show" with her family, a Sunday tradition.

"Think of the students in the movie 'Grease' or the television show 'Happy Days' and that's very much like the world I grew up in," said Clinton, who grew up in the Chicago suburbs.

Clinton served as president of the local fan club for Fabian, who gained fame in the 1950s and 1960s with songs such as "Turn Me Loose" and "Tiger." The club "consisted of me and two other girls," she said.

Politics interested Clinton at an early age, she said. She was member of the student council and vice president of her junior class. As a senior in high school, she ran for student government president against several boys and lost.

"I wasn't surprised about losing, but I really minded when one of my opponents told me I was 'really stupid if I thought a girl could be elected president,'" she said.

Associated Press, November 29, 2007

NEW YORK - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are in a tussle over whether the government should require everyone to carry health insurance.

Arcane as it may sound, the debate has become a proxy battle over questions of leadership, judgment and who is more committed to bringing health care to all Americans.

AT ISSUE:

All the leading Democratic presidential contenders have laid out comprehensive plans that they say will reduce the cost of health care and provide coverage to the 47 million uninsured. But they part ways over the issue of an "individual mandate," which would require everyone to have insurance just as most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance.

Clinton has made such a mandate the centerpiece of her plan, insisting that it is the only way to bring coverage to all. The New York senator would offer federal tax subsidies to help consumers pay for insurance, with the expectation that costs would come down over time as insurers begin to compete for a larger pool of consumers.

She has not yet said specifically how she would enforce such a mandate, saying those details would be worked out in consultation with Congress. She has spoken favorably of a so-called "default enrollment," in which those without coverage would be placed in a plan through school, work or when they seek health care.

John Edwards has also proposed an individual mandate and this week laid out the steps he would take to enforce it. Under his plan, those who refuse to participate could see their wages garnished or face penalty payments.

Obama's plan does not include an individual mandate for adults. The Illinois senator has argued that people cannot be compelled to buy insurance until the cost of coverage is substantially reduced. He would require all children to be covered and would offer subsidies to the working poor. Over time, he says, the cost savings realized through his plan would enable everyone to afford to purchase insurance.

THE SPIN:

Clinton has sought to portray Obama as unwilling to fight for universal coverage, settling instead for a plan that could leave as many as 15 million people uninsured. Obama, in turn, has tried to depict Clinton as unrealistic and evasive on the issue.

"He has called his plan universal, then he has called it 'virtually universal,' but it simply does not deserve that label," Clinton told an audience in Iowa on Wednesday. "When it comes to truth in labeling, his plan simply flunks the test."

Obama responded to Clinton's criticisms Wednesday, reiterating his view that people cannot be forced to buy coverage until it is made more affordable. And, he said, she has never explained how she would enforce her requirement that everyone must obtain coverage. "So until she clarifies what exactly she intends to do to enforce this mandate - is she going to fine people, is she going to take other steps to enforce it - this is more of a political point that she's trying to make than a real point," Obama said.

FACT CHECK:

Health policy experts generally agree that the best way to achieve truly universal coverage is to enact a "single payer" health care system that is run by the government. While the health systems in most other wealthy industrialized nations are largely government-run, the single-payer model has been rejected as "socialized medicine" in the U.S.

Absent a single-payer system, many experts believe the individual mandate would help move the country toward universal health care but would not automatically result in everyone being covered. And Massachusetts, which last year became the first state to require its residents to carry health insurance, has vividly demonstrated its limitations.

Officials there have granted waivers to 20 percent of state residents who cannot afford coverage, even the new, lower-priced plans subsidized by the government. Hundreds of thousands more have refused to purchase coverage despite the mandate, risking a tax penalty that could be as high as $1,000 next year.

When she unveiled her health care plan in September, Clinton told The Associated Press that she was aware of the problems in the Massachusetts system but felt confident the federal government had "tools" at its disposal to address problems a state government might not.

By Beth Fouhy, Associated Press, November 29, 2007

LAKE FOREST, Calif. - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton used an appearance at one of the nation's largest evangelical churches Thursday to sketch a broad agenda to take on disease around the globe, calling it "the right thing to do."

The centerpiece of a speech laced with Biblical references and reflections on her own faith was a call to spend billions of dollars to combat HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases at home and abroad. She said she would try to stamp out malaria deaths in Africa within eight years.

Money and government alone cannot solve the problems, she said. AIDS "is a problem of our common humanity, and we are called to respond with love, with mercy and with urgency," she said.

With the presidential campaign intensifying in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, Clinton was alone among leading candidates to fly to coastal California to appear at Saddleback Church in Orange County, where pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren convenes a conference each year to highlight the global threat posed by HIV/AIDS.

Earlier this week Clinton released her proposal to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS, which focuses in part on fighting the spread of the illness in minority communities. As president, she would double the HIV/AIDS research budget at the National Institutes of Health - to $5.2 billion annually - and spend at least $50 billion within five years around the globe.

On Thursday, speaking to about 1,700 conference attendees, she said as president she would also call for spending $1 billion a year to address malaria infection in Africa. She set a goal of eradicating malaria deaths in Africa by the end of her second term.

Many Christian conservatives dread the possibility of another Clinton White House, a point of agreement in a year when prominent leaders in the movement have divided their loyalties among GOP contenders.

There was a sprinkle of criticism from conservatives in response to Clinton's appearance at the church, but it was muted compared to last year when more than a dozen conservative leaders signed a letter urging Warren to rescind an invitation to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., who supports abortion rights. The church defended his appearance.

Warren is theologically and socially conservative, but he is known for avoiding the scrum of partisan politics. The author of "The Purpose-Driven Life" has devoted much of his time in recent years mobilizing evangelicals to fight AIDS in Africa.

The speech gave Clinton a chance to appear on stage with the popular pastor - who greeted her with a hug - as well as talk at length about her own faith.

"I've been raised to understand the power and purpose of prayer," she said at one point.

Warren thanked her for attending. "We invited all of them to come, but she was the one who showed up," he said.

By Michael R. Blood, Associated Press, November 30, 2007