The Democratic candidates for president will be debating tonight at 8pm Central Time at Drexel University in Philadelphia. The debate will be broadcast live on MSNBC.

What do you hope to see? What are your impressions of the candidates?

UPDATE: Courtesy of the Dodd campaign, the Talk Clock:

http://chrisdodd.com/files/talkclock/philly-chart.html

The Turner Report tells us that:

The corporate hog farming industry just latched on to one of the most powerful lobbyists in Missouri, as if it needed any more help.  Missouri Ethics Commission records indicate Smithfield Foods, Inc., Smithfield, Va., the conglomerate which has swallowed up Murphy Farms and Premium Standard, as of Oct. 15, has former state representative Jewell Patek as its lobbyist.

Considering the in-roads the corporate farms have been making under the administration of Patek’s close friend, Governor Matt Blunt, this does not bode well for Missourians who have been trying to stop the spread and the resulting contamination from these businesses.

To describe Jewell Patek as a close friend of Matt Blunt is like describing Tom Hagen as a friend of the Godfather.  It may be true, but there’s so much more to it. 

Trouble is that the “so much more” is tricky to follow for those of us who just get a paycheck and pay our bills.  We’re not in the habit of following the money.  Take a look, for example, at how Blunt, Patek, et. al., pressured Southwest Missouri State University last year to dump their lobbyist in favor of Patek.  Fired Up! explains how it worked, starting with a quote from a front page, above the fold story in the Columbia Daily Tribune in March of last year:

Patek did not return phone calls seeking comment. When his lobbying firm bid on the SEMO contract in July, the firm offered to do the job for $84,000. The firm listed the governor’s brother, Andy Blunt, “of counsel,” meaning that he was available for legal advice. It also listed Jillian Lair as an associate. Lair is engaged to James Harris, who supervises appointments to boards and commissions in the governor’s office.

It is interesting to note that the contract was approved after Harris had worked to make new appointments to the Board of Regents for SEMO on behalf of Governor Blunt.

This story is entirely consistent with ongoing rumors in the Capitol that the Governor’s office routinely pressures groups to hire Patek’s firm as a lobbyist.

So, Harris works on an appointment to a public body from inside the Governor’s Office, and then a firm that his fiancee, Jillian Lair, works at, that has financial ties to the Governor’s brother, just happens to get a contract from the public body.

This is WAY too cozy. And it’s part of a pattern. There are two other public entities that have hired Patek’s firm after Governor Blunt and Harris made appointments to their boards. Both the Kansas City Police Department and the Jackson County Sports Authority hired Patek-Lair-Blunt’s firm after Blunt appointees joined those governing boards.

Now Smithfield Farms has Patek on the payroll.  That sounds like bad news for those trying to rein in the CAFOs in this state, but consider this: how could Matt Blunt do them any more favors than he’s already been doing?  Short of–what?–jailing the Arrow Rock people who’ve filed a lawsuit against the Department of Natural Resources?–a move way too bald even for Matt Blunt–the governor is already doing all he can.  So Smithfield isn’t angling for more drastic measures, it’s just keeping the payments for services rendered up to date. 

But the folks who are fighting incursions by CAFOs know how to pressure their reps and senators so that, Jewell Patek and Matt Blunt notwithstanding, Smithfield is going to have an increasingly difficult time getting a hearing for any legislation it favors. 

Still, the battle against Smithfield, Tyson, Cargill and MoArk will be uphill until Nixon is elected and appoints someone better than Doyle Childers to head the DNR and until Democrats control the legislature so that bills to rein in the CAFOs can get a hearing at all.

I was just involved

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid filed a motion today to limit debate on a bill that would reauthorize and expand SCHIP.  The vote could come as early as tomorrow, Tuesday.

The bill, similar to the bill vetoed by Bush earlier this month would expand the SCHIP Legislation to cover 10 million children and increase funding $35 billion over the next five years.  The money would come from a 61-cent increase on cigarettes.  Like the adjusted House bill, this bill specifically limits coverage to children in families with incomes below 300% of poverty level. 

A similar measure passed the House last week by a 265 to 142 vote.  The vote is considered veto proof in the Senate but the House still does not appear to have the votes to override.  Bush is expected to veto.

According to CQ, how the Democrats address the November 16 expiration of the continuing resolution under which SCHIP is currently operating, (the previous bill expired on September 30) will signal how they intend to proceed.

Passing a short-term extension of the program “would suggest that Democrats still hope to negotiate a permanent expansion of SCHIP with Republicans,” while passing a long-term extension — which could expire directly prior to the 2008 elections — “would suggest that Democrats have resolved to use children’s health insurance as a political weapon.

Related to this is Howard Dean’s response to the issue:

The Republican leaders have made their choice, they want to stay in Iraq and deny our kids health care. America cannot afford four more years of a president who borrows for the war and denies health insurance for our kids

Where to start? A young attorney who works for the governor points out that the governor’s office isn’t following its own written policy on archiving office e-mails. Later, that same young attorney is fired “for cause” – that is, for inappropriate e-mails which were forwarded to his state e-mail account.

The irony is astounding. Think about it. The governor’s office managed to save those particular e-mails.

Blunt lawyer claims fired because questioned office handling of emails [tiny URL]
By Jo Mannies
POST-DISPATCH POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
10/28/2007

A former lawyer in Gov. Matt Blunt’s office says he was fired last month after he raised questions about how the governor’s staff was handling office e-mails and public records requests….

….”I believed I was fired for pointing to written office policy which … contradicted how the office was handling record requests,” Eckersley said….

….To back up AuBuchon’s assertions about Eckersley, the Office of Administration had sent unsolicited to the Post-Dispatch, by overnight mail, a box containing hundreds of pages of Eckersley’s office e-mails. The e-mails included those dealing with his father’s business and the one e-mail from the sex site.

The box was sent Friday, before the newspaper made any calls to Blunt’s office about Eckersley’s firing….

Ah, the “baby” Blunt administration, a paragon of  Missouri Sunshine Law efficiency. You no longer have to request the records, they’ll just anticipate your needs and forward it all to you. Such service. Especially when it comes to self-serving damage control.

I’m wondering if the governor’s office thinks all the spam e-mail they get is an indication that a lot of people really like them. Nah.

It gets more interesting:

Attorney speaks out about being fired [tiny URL]
….Martin’s buildup to a charge of accessing an inappropriate Web site took about a week. On Friday, Sept. 21, Eckersley had a verbal confrontation with his boss, chief counsel Henry Herschel, over a policy matter in the governor’s office. Eckersley thought Herschel had spoken to him in an inappropriate fashion, and he told Herschel as much.

The state’s rendition of that meeting says it was Eckersley who “shouted and ranted and made threatening motions toward his boss….”

The “baby” Blunt administration – the gang that can’t fire anyone without tripping over their untied shoelaces.

I’m surprised Eckersley wasn’t accused of participating in an international financial scam – you know, with all those overseas bankers sending random e-mails to people asking for help in transferring their funds.

In a posting titled “The Art of the Hissy Fit”, Digby traces ten years worth of Republicans humiliating Democrats with bursts of faux outrage.  She starts with Newt Gingrich’s hypocritical “disgust” over the Lewinsky affair–this from the man who dropped his wife, who was dying of cancer, for a younger woman.

The example par excellence is the way Republicans twisted the events that took place at Paul Wellstone’s funeral, accusing those who attended of making political hay out of his death:

[T]hose in attendance, including the Republicans, were non-plussed by the nature of the event at the time. It was not, as the chatterers insisted, a funeral, but rather more like an Irish wake for Wellstone supporters – a celebration of Wellstone’s life, which included, naturally, politics. (He died campaigning, after all.) But Vin Weber, one of the Republican party’s most sophisticated operatives, immediately saw the opportunity for a faux outrage fest that was more successful than even he could have ever dreamed.

By the time they were through, the Democrats were prostrating themselves at the feet of anyone who would listen, begging for forgiveness for something they didn’t do, just to stop the shrieking.

Republicans are especially fond of this tactic to divert attention from their own, their real, sins. 

Matt Blunt has watched his elders and mastered the art of the hissy fit.  Finding himself on the hot seat for making it standard operating procedure to delete e-mails that should have been saved as part of the public record, Blunt decided to shift the focus to Jay Nixon’s sins.  Matt’s minions started frothing about Nixon using his state car and security to travel to political events.

Jay, not wanting public discourse diverted to this non-issue, agreed–after pointing out that he had done nothing wrong–to pay back almost $50,000 for the use of the car and security details.  He suggested, furthermore, that Blunt could do the same thing.  Certainly the law requires that Blunt use the state security detail at all times, but the law doesn’t require that Blunt take those services free.  Mel Carnahan didn’t when he was governor.  He paid the state back for using them.

How much more should Blunt be obliged to do so when you consider that his transportation and security cost the state $1.25 million in the fiscal year ending last July.  Quite a bit of that one and a quarter mil must have been spent ferrying him between Jefferson City and Springfield because his wife doesn’t like the digs in Jeff City.  Poor baby, to have to live in the wrong … mansion.

Blunt’s self righteousness rings false, too, in light of his wrapping his arms around his over-limit campaign contributions and essentially claiming, it’s mine, all mine.  Nixon, of course, has offered to give his over-limit money back.

But that’s the way Republican hissy fits work.  They assume nobody will notice the hypocrisy because their screeches render thought almost impossible.  It’s like trying to multiply in your head with a fire alarm blasting in your ears.

So far, Jay’s been patient with the tantrums from the other side.  Fine.  Just so he doesn’t grovel.  No whining about the unfairness of it all, please.  And above all, no apologies. 

Meanwhile, by the way, the focus is shifting back to the e-mail issue, because one of Blunt’s top men just revealed he was fired for objecting to the policy of deleting them.  Man, did they smear their own guy.  Over that, their shrieks have risen into the range beyond the hearing of bats.  I look forward to accusations and counterclaims in this crisis of their own making. 

It looks like the Democratic field is now set for the Attorney General’s race. That must mean it’s time for another round of Show Me Progress’ Q & A Series. This week’s question: “What will you do as Attorney General to defend workers’ rights?”

The rules are simple:

1) Answers must be 250 words or less.

2) Answers must be received by noon on Wednesday.

Check back for the answers!