The Din: Afghanistan Looms for Obama, but Palin Dominates Another News Cycle

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

Think President Obama misses being on American soil?

Democrats, in November, are looking for new ideas to pay for health care… and Republicans are now warring over abortion, too… there’s rumblings inside the top levels of the administration… a major Gitmo announcement is coming Friday… we’re about to get in deeper in Afghanistan, but only if it brings us closer to the way out… George W. Bush wants smaller government…

But this is Sarah Palin’s world — and that’s really all we can see from our porches right now.

There may be no better example of the power and perils associated with the former governor of Alaska than what we’ll see over the next week.

There is precisely one superstar in the Republican Party — and she happens, by choice, not to hold elected office, or feel as if she owes much of anything to anyone in the party establishment. (And you thought tea parties might be dangerous?)

On this Friday the 13th, the Palin craze is starting a few days earlier than anticipated — with Oprah and an early copy of the book coming before the Barbara Walters interviews next week.

According to the AP, which got hold of a copy of “Going Rogue” a few days early, Palin writes she was “bottled up” by the McCain campaign, and decries the “jaded aura” of political operatives.

This breaks some china — and is specific enough for dispute: “She says that most of her legal bills were generated defending what she called frivolous ethics complaints, but she reveals that about $50,000 was a bill she received to pay for the McCain campaign vetting her for the VP nod,” the AP’s Richard T. Pienciak writes. “She said when she asked the McCain campaign if it would help her financially, she was told McCain’s camp would have paid all the bills if he’d won; since he lost, the vetting legal bills were her responsibility.”

And, cue: “To my knowledge, the campaign did not receive any bill from Gov. Palin for legal expenses connected to her vetting, nor did the campaign ask her to pay any vetting-related expenses,” Trevor Potter, a lawyer for the McCain presidential campaign, told USA Today’s Kathy Kiely.

Drudge has an excerpt from the section on Nicolle Wallace pushing for the Katie Couric interview: “She just has such low self-esteem,” Wallace is quoted as saying of Couric. “Katie [wants] people to like her… She wants you to like her.”

Writes Palin: “Hearing all that, I almost started to feel sorry for her. Katie had tried to make a bold move from lively morning gal to serious anchor, but the new assignment wasn’t going very well.”

ABC’s Kate Snow, on “Good Morning America” Friday: “Last year, she had a campaign bus; this year, the bus will be wrapped with the front cover of her new book. . . . It’s payback time.”

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos: “There’s no question that this book tour can put her in a position to run.”

Get set: “The rollout for former Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s highly anticipated and score-settling memoir began Thursday with all the orchestrated stagecraft, wild accusations, inconvenient leaks and media fascination that characterized her campaign as Sen. John McCain’s running mate during the 2008 presidential race,” Jason Horowitz and Michael D. Shear write in The Washington Post.

The responses from former McCain aides are mostly anonymous — so far: “John McCain offered her the opportunity of a lifetime, and during the campaign it seems that, for all of her mistakes, she is searching for people to blame,” said one former senior official in the McCain campaign. “We don’t need to go through this again.”

Another broadside, in Palin’s interview with Oprah, on the fallout from the Couric interview: “The campaign said, ‘Right on. Good. You’re showing your independence. This is what America needs to see and it was a good interview,’ ” Palin said. “And of course I’m thinking, if you thought that was a good interview, I don’t know what a bad interview is, because I knew it wasn’t a good interview.”

(She goes easy on Levi Johnston, and Levi thinks he knows why: “She knows what I got on her. It’s a smart move on her part,” Johnston said Thursday, at the Fleshbot awards. Yes, it is what you think it is. You absolutely, positively, cannot make this stuff up.)

The president is in Japan Friday, and held a news conference with Prime Minister Hatoyama Friday morning.

On Afghanistan: “I don’t think this is a matter of some datum of information I’m waiting on,” the president said. “It is a matter of making certain that when I send the young men and women into war, and I devote billions of dollars of US taxpayer money, that it’s making us safer.”

And on the Gitmo announcement: “I’m absolutely convinced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice. The American people insist on it. My administration will insist on it.”

More on that front, per the AP: “An Obama administration official says accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court. The official tells The Associated Press that Attorney General Eric Holder is scheduled to announce the decision later Friday morning.”

On the president’s agenda Friday, per ABC’s Sunlen Miller: “The White House says that it is likely the President and Prime Minister will discuss the controversial Futenma base issue, but did not anticipate an agreement coming out of their meetings today.”

Looming over everything is Afghanistan.

Getting out, as we get deeper in: “President Barack Obama is seeking an approach to eventually ending U.S. involvement in Afghanistan even as he weighs a possible expansion of the American military role in the conflict,” Bloomberg’s Edwin Chen and Viola Gienger write.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates: “How do we signal resolve and at the same time signal to the Afghans as well as to the American people that this isn’t an open-ended commitment?”

AP dispatch from Friday morning: “President Obama aimed Friday to shore up relations with a new Japanese government vowing to be more assertive with its U.S. ally, even as he grapples with sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.”

“The key sticking points appear to be timelines and mounting questions about the credibility of the Afghan government,” an administration official tells ABC’s Jake Tapper. “After years of substantial investments by the American people, governance in Afghanistan must improve in a reasonable period of time to ensure a successful transition to our Afghan partner.”

Anyone shocked that he’s after middle ground? “President Barack Obama wants to blend together elements of the different troop-increase options presented to him Wednesday to formulate a new strategy for the Afghan war, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday,” The Wall Street Journal’s Peter Spiegel writes.

What else Gates is saying, on all the leaks: “Everybody out there ought to just shut up,” he said, per ABC’s Kirit Radia.

What the president is saying: “We’ll give you the strategy and clear mission you deserve,” Obama said at his stop-off in Anchorage, per ABC’s Rachel Martin.

Casualties of the war over the war: “The Obama administration’s internal debate over Afghan policy has escalated into a battle of media leaks that’s straining relations between officials who’re seeking a major troop increase and those who want a more limited approach and a greater focus on domestic priorities,” McClatchy’s Jonathan S. Landay, Dion Nissenbaum and John Walcott report.

“The feud also has poisoned ties between the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan and the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, and left the administration struggling for leverage to press Afghan President Hamid Karzai to appoint untainted officials to his new government, attack corruption and share power with the parliament and provincial officials.”

RNC scrambling, then action: “The chairman of the Republican National Committee announced late Thursday that he is unilaterally ending coverage of elective abortion under the RNC’s Cigna health-care plan,” per ABC’s Teddy Davis.

“Money from our loyal donors should not be used for this purpose,” said RNC Chair Michael Steele in a written statement. “I don’t know why this policy existed in the past, but it will not exist under my administration. Consider this issue settled.”

Per Politico’s Jonathan Allen and Meredith Shiner, who broke the story Thursday: “Federal Election Commission Records show the RNC purchases its insurance from Cigna, and two sales agents for the company said that the RNC’s policy covers elective abortion. As of Thursday, the RNC’s plan covers elective abortion — a procedure the party’s own platform calls ‘a fundamental assault on innocent human life.’ ”

On health care — liberal groups targeting Democrats, again: Health Care for America Now has new TV ads launching, in Nebraska and Arkansas. From the release going out Friday: “The ads customized for each state and titled ‘Debate’ will run for one week starting today in Fort Smith, Jonesboro, and Little Rock, Arkansas and in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. The total advertising buy is approximately $310,000. The spot explains that while the nation has been discussing health care reform for months, it’s now time for the full Senate to begin its official debate.”

As first reported by the AP’s David Espo: “[Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid is apparently considering an increase in the Medicare payroll tax rate for workers with incomes of more than $250,000 a year, Senate aides said. One idea is to increase the tax rate by one-half of 1 percentage point, to 1.95 percent for high-income people, with an expectation that the government could raise $40 billion to $50 billion over 10 years,” Robert Pear reports in The New York Times.

W. speaks: “I went against my free-market instincts and approved a temporary government intervention to unfreeze the credit markets so that we could avoid a major global depression,” former President George W. Bush said at the unveiling of the George W. Bush Presidential Center at Southern Methodist University, per ABC’s Devin Dwyer and Evan Harris.

They write: “And without mentioning President Obama by name the former President did have some rather pointed comments for the current Administration claiming that generally ‘history shows that the greater threat to prosperity is not too little government involvement, but too much.’ “

“As the world recovers, we will face a temptation to replace the risk-and-reward model of the private sector with the blunt instruments of government spending and control,” Bush said, per Joseph Curl of the Washington Times.

More adieus: “The White House counsel, Gregory B. Craig, has told associates that he intends to step down from his post on Friday, putting to rest long-running speculation about whether he would remain as President Obama’s top lawyer,” Jeff Zeleny writes in The New York Times. “Mr. Craig had been at the center of controversial decisions over whether to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as well as revising administration policies on the interrogation and detention of prisoners. For months, questions have circulated inside the White House about his status, but an official said early Friday that Mr. Craig had made the decision to resign.”

ABC’s Jake Tapper: “Craig will be replaced by attorney Bob Bauer, who has served as President Obama’s private attorney. Bauer will start work in December, so as to help create a seamless transition.”

In Massachusetts, with few distinctions, some endorsements: “Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, a Medford native, is endorsing City Year cofounder Alan Khazei,” per The Boston Globe’s Matt Viser. “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is set to endorse US Representative Michael E. Capuano, a coup for any challenger to [Martha] Coakley, who is seeking to become the first female US senator from Massachusetts.”

Boosting a 2012er — David Brooks really likes Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.: “If you wanted a Republican with the same general body type and athletic grace as Barack Obama, you’d pick Thune,” Brooks writes in his column. “Republicans are still going to have to do root-and-branch renovation if they hope to provide compelling answers to issues like middle-class economic anxiety. But in the meantime, people like Thune offer Republicans a way to connect fiscal discipline with traditional small-town values, a way to tap into rising populism in a manner that is optimistic, uplifting and nice.”

The Kicker:

“Are you tough enough to come here to Massachusetts … So Stephen, are you willing to come?” — Senate candidate Alan Khazei, D-Mass., in a challenge to Stephen Colbert — and looking for a way to get another debate.

“I wouldn’t say they’re making up numbers, but there are no standards or consistency.” — Nevada Controller Kim Wallin, a Democrat, to the Las Vegas Sun, on how the stimulus is being tracked.

For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/

Intern for the ABC News Political Unit:

The ABC News Political Unit is now seeking full-time spring 2010 interns in Washington, D.C.

The paid internship begins Monday, Jan. 4, 2010, and runs through Friday, June 4, 2010.

Political Unit interns attend political events and contribute to stories for the politics page of ABCNews.com. They also help ABC News by conducting research, maintaining our calendar of upcoming political events, and posting stories to ABCNews.com.

In order to apply, you MUST be either a graduate student or an undergraduate student who has completed his or her first year of college. The internship is NOT open to recent graduates.

You also must be able to work eight hours per day, Monday through Friday. Interns will be paid $8.50/hour.

If you write well, follow politics closely, and have some familiarity with web publishing, send a cover letter and resume to Teddy Davis, ABC News’ Deputy Political Director, at teddy.davis@abc.com, by Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009, with the subject line: “INTERN” in all caps.

Please indicate in both your cover letter and the body of your email your student status and the specific dates and hours of your availability.

Dick Armey: Obama Agenda ‘Very Tyrannical’; Republicans Who Support Him Should Beware

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

We asked former House majority leader Dick Armey, whose FreedomWorks organization has helped stir up some of the more vocal “tea party” protests of the past few months, whether some of the rhetoric has gotten out of hand.

Specifically, did House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, cross a line when he called the health care bill “the greatest threat to freedom that I've seen in the 19 years I've been in Washington”?

No way, Armey told us on ABCNews.com's “Top Line” today: “I was there before John Boehner. It's the greatest threat to individual liberty I've seen in my time,” said Armey, R-Texas.

“If you find your personal liberty precious, if you understand the best decisions in commerce and production and distribution and product is decisions made in the private sector, then you find it very tyrannical to have a government dictate to you: 'You must buy this product, as I specify, this product, at the price I set for this product. If you don't do so you will be subject to even criminal sanctions and jail sentences, severe fines and penalties,'” he said.

“The Pointer Sisters had a great point about the song 'Mr. Big Shot, Who Do You Think You Are?' I mean, where the government gets off telling me what I must buy, where I must buy it, what its dimensions or specifications must be, and what price to pay — who do they think they are?”

Asked if there's room in the party for moderate Republicans — such as Senate candidates Charlie Crist, R-Fla., Carly Fiorina, R-Calif., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., all of whom are mistrusted by conservatives — Armey said:

“People who seek high office, who think the stimulus package was a good thing, endorse such trespasses against past privacy rights as card-check and so forth, are people that we think will be counterproductive to our prosperity to our safety and security and rights as citizens — irrespective of party.”

Obama Appointee: ‘Making Progress’ on LGBT Issues; ‘Question of Sequencing Things’

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

When President Obama named Fred Hochberg to head the Export-Import Bank, the selection was cheered by LGBT activists, given Hochberg's prominence in the gay-rights community.

Now he sometimes finds himself in the position of counseling patience.

At this week's Bloomberg Washington Summit, I asked Hochberg about what he tells his friends and allies about the pace of progress on gay-rights issues under the Obama administration.

“People — of course they're going to be skeptical,” Hochberg said. “I think that President Obama's making progress. He would like to make greater progress. I think that, and in almost every area we look at, from LGBT issues to health care and so forth, things sometimes move at a slower pace than we'd like.”

“He's made a very clear personal commitment; he's made a very public commitment. He's made it clear to those of us who are serving the administration that this is important to him. And it's also a question of sequencing things,” Hochberg said.

Watch our discussion HERE.

The conversation also included a discussion of the Ex-Im Bank's attempts to work more seamlessly with small businesses — a Hochberg specialty — the president's trade agenda, and new ideas for job creation.

Hochberg's comments on LGBT issues come amid signs of movement on key priorities for gay-rights leaders. This week, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said Democratic leaders have settled on a strategy to repeal the military's ban on having gays and lesbians serve in the military next year.

Plus, as ABC's Teddy Davis reports, Melody Barnes, the head of the president's Domestic Policy Council, told students at Boston College Law School this week that she disagrees with the president on the subject of same-sex marriage.

Is the Obama Army Stirring?

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

We've been critical in this space of the stop-and-start efforts by Organizing for America — the offshoot of the old Obama campaign operation — to, well, get itself organized effectively.

At Talking Points Memo, Christina Bellantoni gets a glimpse at some metrics that — while still less-than-stunning compared to the 13 million e-mail addresses on the campaign's lists by November 2008 — suggest that “OFA has strengthened into a (smaller) mirror of the campaign, with volunteers in every single Congressional district and staff on the ground in every state but Oklahoma.”

In terms of impact on the Hill, here's a biggie: It was OFA volunteers who flagged for headquarters the possibility that Rep. Joseph Cao, R-La., would vote for the health care bill, Bellantoni reports.

That allowed the organization to turn up the pressure on Cao, in what turned out to be a successful push to get a Republican to support the measure.

We talked about it with Bellantoni on ABCNews.com's “Top Line” today: “I'm sure there's some spin there; they obviously have a good reason to say that their organization is going well. But at the same time, they are organized and they're attacking it in the same way they attacked the campaign. And that was a successful strategy for them, and was really getting the volunteers to do the work.”

And will OFA go after Democrats? “My sense is no,” she said. “We kind of danced around this in my interview with these guys, but essentially they said everybody [in the Democratic Party] wants to see the president's agenda passed.”

Steele to Republicans Who Support Obama: ‘We’ll Come After You’

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: RNC Chairman Michael Steelehas beenendorsing a “big tent” approach to recruiting candidates for 2010, emphasizing the need to find candidates who fit the needs of individual districts.

But on ABCNews.com’s “Top Line” today, Steele made clear there are limits to how far candidates can push the party’s limits.

Asked if he’d be comfortable with Republican candidates in 2010 who supported President Obama’s stimulus package, or his push to overhaul health care, Steele said:

“Well I’m gonna tell you honestly, that’s where the line gets a little bit tricky. And you saw in the House and in the Senate that there are ramifications, because that goes against a core principle. And trust me, you’re assuming that people want to have bloated debt, government expenditures and growth into their lives — they don’t. That’s a talking point out of the DNC.”

“People aren’t buying that. So candidates who live in moderate to slightly liberal districts have got to walk a little bit carefully here, because you do not want to put yourself in a position where you’re crossing that line on conservative principles, fiscal principles, because we’ll come after you,” Steele continued.

“You’re gonna find yourself in a very tough hole if you’re arguing for the president’s stimulus plan or Nancy Pelosi’s health plan. There’s no justification for growing the size of government the way this administration and this Congress wants to do it.”

Steele didn’t mention any candidates by name. But the comments could be interpreted as a warning shot aimed at Republicans who have voiced support for the stimulus — like Gov. Charlie Crist, R-Fla., who’s running for governor next year in a competitive primary — or who, like Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, are supporting health care reform efforts.

Crist told CNN earlier this week that he never endorsed the stimulus package, and that he voiced support for it only because he was simply trying to get the best deal for Florida, given that the stimulus was headed for passage in Washington. However, given Crist’s sharing a stage with President Obama to trumpet the stimulus package and his publicly stated support for it, it will no doubt continue to dog him in his competitive primary against Marco Rubio no matter how strenuously he attempts to walk it back.

Steele also disputed the contention by White House senior adviser David Axelrod that 2009 wasn’t a referendum on the president’s policies, but that 2010 will be.

“You have the president going into New Jersey four times, and you’re going to then sit back after we kick your butt and say, ‘Well, no, this had nothing to do with the president?’ Well why was he there?” Steele said.

“And you can’t sit back at the same time and say … the only reason we’re losing is because our base isn’t excited so pass this horrendous health care bill. And that will excite them? They’re not excited because they’re fearful that you’re going to pass this horrendous health care bill because this is not the change that they voted for. They’ve missed that point.”

“So don’t get in front of the White House lawn and give me this sort of disingenuous, ‘Oh well, you know, ’09 isn’t about the president, 2010 is going to be about passing our agenda and that way people will be excited again.’ They’re not excited because they’re fearful of what it is you want to pass.”

Watch our full interview withthe RNC chairmanHERE.

UPDATE: The Democratic National Committee jumped on the interview after it aired, saying that Steele is tying himself to “extremist” elements inside the Republican Party:

“With today's threat to 'come after' moderate Republicans or those that would work for bipartisan solutions, it's clear the Michael Steele and the Republican party are ready to hand over the keys of the GOP to Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck and the rest of the extremist tea party crowd,” DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan said in a statement.

“And in establishing a policy of purging moderates, the Republicans have committed themselves to being an extreme ideological party that will only turn-off independent voters and further marginalize an already isolated party going into 2010 and beyond.”

President Obama’s Operating Space on Afghanistan Gets Narrower

ABC News' Kristina Wong reports: A month into reviewing U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, President Obama appears to be operating in an increasingly narrowing space between reality on the ground in Afghanistan and political camps in Washington, with pressure closing in from all sides.

Leading one camp is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who is urging the president to make a decision on strategy in Afghanistan as soon as possible, and follow the recommendations laid out by Gen. Stanley McChrystal in his Aug. 30 assessment on how to succeed in Afghanistan, including adopting a counterinsurgency strategy that would strengthen Afghanistan’s central government, and deprive al-Qaida of a safe haven there. McCain is also urging the president to follow McChrystal’s recommendation of increasing the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by around 40,000 – the middle option of three recommended in a separate troops request.

“We are not operating in a vacuum now. 68,000 Americans are there already. Eight young Americans were killed in a firefight – one of the reasons is they didn’t have adequate support – just recently,” McCain said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday.

On the other side is Vice President Joe Biden, who reportedly favors a counterterrorism strategy that would scale back the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and specifically target members of al-Qaida with predator drone attacks. With him are liberal Democrats such as Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who said this weekend, he would move to legislatively cut off funds for additional troops should the president decide to order a large number of additional American troops to Afghanistan.

“I am already working with people like Representative Jim McGovern, Republican Congressman Walter Jones, Barbara Lee and others to prepare for that possibility. I have already voted against various spending bills that support this policy. I didn’t even think the addition of the troops earlier this year made sense. So there will be resistance to this if necessary,” said Feingold, who also spoke Sunday on “Face the Nation”.

Another parameter shaping President Obama’s decision-making space is the upcoming Nov. 7 run-off presidential election in Afghanistan, after its first election on Aug. 20 was found by international monitors to be fraught with fraud perpetrated by supporters of the current Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. One camp is urging President Obama to not wait until after the election, while the other deems it necessary to see what type of government the U.S. could be working with.

After Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., returned last week from a diplomatic tour de force to Afghanistan, during which he convinced President Karzai to accept the International Election Commission’s vote count and agree to a run-off election, he urged the president to wait until after the Nov. 7 elections to make a decision on strategy, saying it would “irresponsible” to decide to send more troops before then.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, blasted the idea the president should wait until after the elections to make a decision on strategy.

“I understand why these are tough decisions, but I think it’s taken too long and some people have been hypercritical in suggesting that he’s waiting until after this election because [Democrats] have some tough governorships up for election. I hope that’s not the case,” Hatch said on CNN’s “State of the Union”, referring to the upcoming Nov. 4 gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia – where Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine and Democrat Creigh Deeds are facing competitive races.

Asked whether Hatch agreed with former Vice President Dick Cheney, who recently accused the president of “dithering” on Afghanistan strategy and emboldening U.S. adversaries, he said he would never want to call his president “dithering.”

“I know it’s a tough position that he’s in, but why not follow he advice of all of his generals and especially General McChrystal?” Hatch said. “They need these troops, there’s no question about it. And we’re exposing our young men and women over there – a number of them have been killed, I’m not blaming the president for that, but we’re exposing them without the proper help that they’ve just got to have.”

But Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, disagreed, saying the president should be taking his time in getting the strategy right.

“We want to do this right. We should move deliberatively. We should move in a way that the president is doing by making this decision the right way,” Brown said, also on “State of the Union. “The president is doing it right, I think, waiting until the – not the Virginia and New Jersey election, but waiting until the election in Kabul and in the Helmand province and in Kandahar is the right way to go.”

While White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said last Sunday the president was not delaying a decision based on the elections’ outcome, he said that “most important” was that Afghanistan “get a government that is seen as legitimate to the people and has the credibility to be a partner in the effort to secure Afghanistan.”

One element complicating the dilemma of whether to wait for the run-off election results or not is the broad expectation that President Karzai — who is associated with Afghanistan's current corrupt and inept central government — will win. Recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said one could conclude the likelihood of Afghan President Kharzai “winning a second round is probably pretty high.”

Therefore, on one hand, elections could fail to lend the Afghan government sufficient credibility if the winner is Karzai – and troops would be needed to bolster security in Afghanistan regardless of the elections' outcome. But on the other hand, the elections themselves could lend credibility to Karzai or the winning government, which could provide the U.S. with a credible Afghan partner and help improve the security situation in Afghanistan without a large number of additional troops.

White House officials have downplayed the importance of additional troops as the main determinant of success in Afghanistan, citing governance and economic development as other important determinants. The Wall Street Journal recently reported the possibility of a hybrid strategy, between a 40,000 troops increase, and the scaled-back counterterrorism strategy presented by Biden.

Yet, middle ground for the Obama Administration could be getting scarcer, with President Karzai and his opponent, former foreign minister of Afghanistan Dr. Abdullah Abdullah calling for additional U.S. troops in Afghanistan themselves.

“The need for more troops is there in order to reverse the situation. If the situation is not reversed from deteriorating further the security situation, so the future of this country will be at risk,” Abdullah said on FOX’s “Fox News Sunday.”

“This situation requires a sort of dramatic increase in the number of troops in order to stop it from further deteriorating and reversing it. The permanent solution is in a road map that Afghanistan stands on its own feet in a few years down the road, number of troops could be decreased in Afghanistan, finally, and eventually will stand on its own feet,” Abdullah said.

A month after the President began his strategy review, and nearly two months after McChrystal’s assessment, pressure is closing in from all sides, with the same questions are still largely unanswered – what strategy will the president decide on and when? Will he send more American troops to Afghanistan and how many?

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., empathized with the president.

“I’m wrestling with it myself, and boy it’s difficult. There is no good answer,” Schumer said.

Unusual Business: Movement on health care tests Obama’s ties to his base

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

Let's get this straight…

$250 billion doesn't cost a dime. To see President Obama talk tough with Wall Street Tuesday night, it cost more than 300,000 dimes a couple. (That's a lot of mops.)

The anti-war candidate is now thinking about escalating a war. But mostly, for now, he's thinking (while Sen. John Kerry serves as de facto secretary of state?).

And those doors behind which health care is being hashed out are really wide open — promise.

For a hungry left, the question is fast becoming: How many half loaves are going to be enough?

As we move closer (or so we're told) to a House vote on health care — it's worth remembering that the most vocal segments of the president's base are a sophisticated audience. They see past floor votes and conference committees (and can't see through closed doors that were promised to be open).

It's some politics-as-usual — closed-door meetings, gifts to key constituencies, with the president on the trail — that the president needs to get from here to there.

And on Afghanistan — growing public skepticism (just 45 percent support for the president's handling of the war, and 63 percent saying he lacks a clear plan, in the new ABC News/Washington Post poll) — with a run-off election in place. This is the time for a “quiet period” on health care? (Was he just too noisy before?)

“As Congressional leaders and White House officials huddle behind closed doors to settle their differences on health care legislation, one of the most powerful voices in the debate — President Obama's — has grown noticeably quieter,” Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes in The New York Times. “The idea, aides said, is for the president to take a breather while Democrats resolve their internal conflicts, so he can come back strong with a fresh sales pitch when the legislation moves closer to floor votes.”

Said David Axelrod: “I think his time is better spent on this particular issue in conversation with members and in talking to his own advisers and instructing them on how to proceed.”

“We've reached the top, we're headed downhill now, and we want it to stay that way,” White House deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer tells the Los Angeles Times' Peter Nicholas.

Where's the president loudest? Raising money, in New York City Tuesday night — and streaming live for Organizing for America members:

” 'Yes we can' wasn't just a motto,” the president said, per ABC's Sunlen Miller. “That's what we're all about.”

In the House — no more delaying that day of reckoning, pitting left vs. center:

“Speaker Nancy Pelosi told Democrats Tuesday night that she wants to move forward with the more liberal version of a House health reform bill that would peg government-run coverage to Medicare — setting up a clash with moderates in her caucus who oppose the plan,” Politico's Patrick O'Connor reports. “Pelosi told her rank-and-file that she has more than 200 votes for a public option tethered to Medicare and that she wants to ‘see if we can find the remaining votes,' one member present said afterward.”

“The caucus will meet again Wednesday evening to retake the Democratic temperature. If the 218 votes are there, the party will plow forward and go to conference committee negotiations with a strong hand,” Ryan Grim reports at Huffington Post.

Life in the Senate for the public option — but not in a version that liberals are going to like: “Senate liberals are seeking to convince [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid that the public option has more support than the Finance Committee's votes suggested. And as the majority leader prepares to release a combined bill as soon as Friday, he is canvassing moderate Democrats to determine how much leeway he may have,” The Washington Post's Shailagh Murray and Lori Montgomery report.

A touch of payback, as Reid, D-Nev., gets tough: “Top Senate Democrats intend to try to strip the health insurance industry of its exemption from federal antitrust laws as part of the debate over health care, according to congressional officials, the latest evidence of a deepening struggle over President Barack Obama's top domestic priority,” the AP's David Espo writes. “If enacted, the switch would mean greater federal regulation for an industry that recently has stepped up its criticism of portions of a health care bill moving toward the Senate floor.”

Reid hears more noise back home: Americans United for Change is going up with $23,000 worth of radio ad buys in Nevada. This one bring sugar: “Luckily the guy whose has been handed the baton to run that last lap – is Nevada's Senator Harry Reid. Luckily… because Harry Reid isn't afraid to fight the insurance companies. He's already gone after their anti-trust exemption…. and he'll keep fighting until we get health care for all Americans — including a public option — this year.”

Yet … with the president still in campaign mode (he's in New Jersey Wednesday night to campaign for Gov. Jon Corzine, D-N.J.) — this is hardly a vote of confidence from a candidate he'll be alongside next week:

“I don't think the public option is necessary in any plan and I think Virginia — certainly, I would certainly consider, opting out if that were available to Virginia,” Creigh Deeds, D-Va., said at Tuesday's gubernatorial debate, per ABC's Teddy Davis.

(Underwhelming day for Deeds, despite the star power. Politico's Jonathan Martin and Andy Barr: “It's doubtful that any of the few hundred people who turned up for Democrat Creigh Deeds at a Northern Virginia campaign office needed a reminder that their candidate is trailing badly in his race for governor. They got one anyway — courtesy of the former president and still-current political analyst Bill Clinton, who offered the small-by-late-October-standards crowd an extended discourse on why Deeds's situation is not necessarily as bad as it seems.”)

Minding the numbers: “House Democrats have cut the cost of their health care bill from more than $1 trillion over 10 years to $871 billion over a decade,” the AP's Erica Werner reports. “Getting to $871 billion requires going with a strong government plan to sell insurance in competition with private insurers — something Pelosi and liberals have pushed for.”

Tending the base: Organizing for America's Mitch Stewart writes an e-mail to supporters on Wednesday, taking a victory lap (it helps when you set your own goals and then exceed them thrice over). “I'm looking at the numbers, and with almost all of the reports now in, the tally wasn't 200,000 calls placed or pledged — it was 315,023. You did it. . . . You set a new OFA record, you caught the national media's attention, and you certainly put Congress on notice. But you know that's not what really matters.”

Fudging the math: “Medicare is hurtling toward insolvency, but [Sen. Debbie] Stabenow would essentially repeal past cost-cutting efforts,” Dana Milbank writes in his Washington Post column. “And even granting that it's a good idea not to cut Medicare payments to doctors, it's a strange interpretation of honesty to separate this $250 billion cost from the health-care bill and then claim that the other bill doesn't raise the deficit.”

“It's never been something everyone said you had to pay for,” Stabenow said Tuesday onABCNews.com's “Top Line.”

Not so fast: “What seemed like an easy solution last week in the health-care negotiations is now facing uphill battles in both chambers, which is why Democrats are relying on physicians' groups to throw the power of their lobby behind the bill,” Time's Jay Newton-Small reports. “The AMA has run $200,000 worth of ads in a dozen states in the past week and has pledged to spend upwards of $1.8 million on more. Likewise the seniors' lobbying organization AARP, which strongly supports the legislation, has run about $2 million in ads in the past two weeks, mostly on this issue.”

The big messaging picture: “With a series of private meetings and public taunts, the White House has targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the biggest-spending pro-business lobbying group in the country; Rush Limbaugh, the country's most-listened-to conservative commentator; and now, with a new volley of combative rhetoric in recent days, the insurance industry, Wall Street executives and Fox News,” Politico's Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen report.

“All of the techniques are harnessed to a larger purpose: to marginalize not only the individual person or organization but also some of the most important policy and publicity allies of the national Republican Party,” they write.

Obama's war: “Barack Obama's ratings for handling the war in Afghanistan have dropped sharply, with Americans by 2-1 saying he lacks a clear plan there. But the public itself is divided on how to proceed, torn between the difficulties of the war and the threat of Taliban or al Qaeda-backed terrorism,” ABC polling director Gary Langer writes in his analysis.

“Forty-five percent now approve of the president's handling of the situation, down by 10 points in a month, 15 points since August and 18 points from its peak last spring. His approval rating on Afghanistan has fallen farther than on any other issue in ABC News/Washington Post polls this year.”

The Post's Dan Balz and Jon Cohen: “Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, has recommended the substantial increase in troop strength, and 47 percent of those polled favor the buildup, while 49 percent oppose it. Most on both sides hold their views ‘strongly.' ”

The pressure builds: “The longer we delay to send the necessary additional troops, the longer it will be that our troops are unnecessarily in danger,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told ABC News, in Martha Raddatz's “Good Morning America” report Wednesday.

Kerry, D-Mass., is back in Washington Wednesday — and headed to the White Housefor a debrief, at 12:40 pm ET.

Man of the many hours: “What began as a routine fact-finding trip to Afghanistan last week turned into a high-profile diplomatic foray for Senator John F. Kerry, who unexpectedly plunged into five days of talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai to resolve a political impasse over disputed elections that threatened to drag the country deeper into crisis,” The Boston Globe's Farah Stockman reports.

“Hours after he landed in Kabul on Friday, the Massachusetts Democrat was called upon by the US ambassador to negotiate with Karzai, a request that triggered a marathon of detailed meetings — over tea, over dinner, and in private strolls on grounds of the presidential palace. Yesterday, Kerry stood beside Karzai as the Afghan president announced that he had agreed to a runoff election Nov. 7.”

ABC's Jonathan Karl reports that Karzai wanted to back out at the last minute: “As the afternoon drags on, Kerry takes a walk with Karzai on the presidential compound for another more one-on-one talk. The two men visit a mosque on the presidential compound and then return to the palace. Karzai agrees, once again, to accept the updated election results and the run-off election.”

Also on the president's schedule: “President Barack Obama will announce initiatives Wednesday aimed at boosting credit to small businesses, as the White House tries to address a complicated issue many believe is dragging on the economy,” The Wall Street Journal's Damien Paletta and Deborah Solomon report. “The White House will move to increase the caps on Small Business Administration loans and to make it easier for small banks to access funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, an administration official said.”

Warning to Wall Street: “If there are members of the financial industry in the audience today, I will ask that you join with us in passing what are necessary reforms — don't fight them, join us on it,” the president said at a DNC fundraiser Tuesday night, per ABC's Sunlen Miller.

Back to health care — casting concerns in a slightly different way:

“Americans are increasingly worried about the cost and quality of medical care that could result from President Obama's effort to revamp health care, but a majority still trust him more than Republicans to change the system, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows,” John Fritze reports for USA Today. “The poll, which comes as Senate leaders are crafting a bill for a critical floor vote, finds that people who fear their costs would increase under the measure jumped 7 percentage points since last month, to 49%. There were similar increases among those who believe that both quality of health care and insurance company red tape will get worse if legislation passes.”

Per Gallup: “By 58% to 38%, Americans would generally prefer to see Congress deal with healthcare reform 'on a gradual basis over several years' rather than 'try to pass a comprehensive reform plan this year.”

Reframing a constant refrain: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell delivers his 50th Senate floor speech of the year on health care, where “he'll talk about the need for reform and argue that Democrat proposals which raise premiums, hike taxes and cut Medicare won't do the job,” per a GOP leadership aide.

“The simple fact is, every Republican in Congress supports reform,” McConnell, R-Ky., writes in a USA Today op-ed. “The dramatic shift between what Americans expected and what they got is the reason so many of them turned out at town hall meetings in August, and it's the reason that an ever increasing percentage of them oppose the health care proposals now taking shape in Congress.”

A one-two political punch: “Treasury officials have privately informed lawmakers that a vote on the debt limit must occur before Congress leaves in December. Republicans believe that the $900 billion or larger increase will feed into voters' concerns about the price tag of the health bill,” Roll Call's Keith Koffler writes. “And Republican Congressional sources talk as if they already have the Virginia gubernatorial contest locked up. They stand ready to use a GOP victory in a moderate state carried by Obama to spook moderate Democrats whose support for health care reform is not a sure bet.”

From the other side: Look for House floor speeches Wednesday morning “to call out congressional Republicans for their hypocrisy on Medicare, failing to make good on their promises to introduce an official health reform bill and for continuing to try to kill reform,” per the Democratic leadership press release.

Making Congress look really … grown-up: “Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to keep them from meeting when Democrats aren't present,” The Hill's Susan Crabtree reports. “Towns' action came after repeated public ridicule from the leading Republican on the committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), over Towns's failure to launch an investigation into Countrywide Mortgage's reported sweetheart deals to VIPs.”

Why? “Because they don't know how to behave,” Towns said in a statement to Politico's Jake Sherman.

Sarah Palin. Oprah. Seriously. “To coincide with the release of her ghost-assisted book, Going Rogue, Palin and her advisers are planning a careful TV and Web rollout in mid November, to be followed by paid speeches to business, civic, and college groups,” Newsweek's Howard Fineman reports. “Assembled with the advice of her Washington lawyer, Bob Barnett, and her speech agency, Washington Speakers Bureau, Palin's junket will go light on the free-ranging, traditional hard-news venues and heavy on personality: one major stop will be Oprah.”

The Kicker:

“I have not been involved in such an open and transparent process as this. I'm very, very proud that we have done it.” — Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., before heading back behind closed doors to meet on health care.

“You can't afford a fund-raiser involving [First Daughters] Malia and Sasha. I'm cheap.” — President Obama, at a DNC event in New York City that cost $30,400 per couple to attend.

For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note's blog . . . all day every day:

Slow Walk: Events overtake Obama, as pace worries Democrats

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports:

Think Harry Reid would have rather been on that balloon?

He gets Vice President Joe Biden in to campaign for him Friday — but only Falcon is answering (or not answering) tougher questions this week.

Reid, D-Nev., could begin to concentrate on his reelection fight (and he's got TV ads up already) if he could begin to get 60 votes together for a health care bill that liberals don't like and conservatives still aren't sold on (those negotiations not coming to a cable channel near you).

So Reid and his team are left to sort out some of the intricacies the White House has avoided.

And for President Obama, the charge and the challenge have inverted themselves: He's gone from trying to do too much to not being able to finish much of anything at all.

There's continuing indecision on health care; tinkering with the stimulus; slow-moving judicial confirmations; and a strangely public debate over Afghanistan policy (shouldn't that be the one that's deliberated in secret?) where events have a tendency to subsume discussions.

It helps to know if the Afghan government can be a true partner if you know what the Afghan government will be (and whether its leaders deserve to be there in the first place):

“An investigation of allegedly fraudulent ballots in Afghanistan's troubled election has reduced President Hamid Karzai's portion of the vote to about 47 percent, an outcome that will trigger a runoff between him and his closest competitor,” Karen DeYoung and Joshua Partlow report in The Washington Post. “The tally by the U.N.-backed Electoral Complaints Commission, which one official called ‘stunning,' is due to be finalized Friday.”

They continue: “The findings have major implications for the Obama administration's ongoing deliberations over Afghanistan war strategy and could eventually help remove the cloud of illegitimacy hanging over its partner government there. But a new election could also make a difficult situation worse, particularly if fraud is once again alleged or if the vote has to be delayed because of the onset of winter.”

A senior White House official tells ABC's Jake Tapper: “The partnership Karzai wants not just with us but other international partners depends on his country seeing him as its legitimate leader.”

Tapper reports: “The crucial question for Karzai: what will he do? Will he accept the judgment of the ECC? Will he push the IEC to reject it? Will he reject its advice altogether?”

“An outright Karzai victory could enrage Dr. Abdullah's supporters, trigger protests and further undermine the legitimacy of Mr. Karzai's government in the eyes of the Afghan public,” Anand Gopal and Jay Solomon report in The Wall Street Journal. “But authorities also could have a tough battle proving that results of a runoff are legitimate.”

More complications: “A wave of attacks against top security installations over the last several days demonstrated that the Taliban, Al Qaeda and militant groups once nurtured by the government are tightening an alliance aimed at bringing down the Pakistani state,” The New York Times' Jane Perlez reports.

Meanwhile, back in Washington: “The pace of the policy review is causing worry in both parties on Capitol Hill,” Dana Milbank writes in his Washington Post column. “There seems to be less urgency at the White House, where the president completed his fifth meeting on the subject this week. But the only thing that seems to emerge from these sessions are new adjectives the White House press office uses to describe the conversation. After the Oct. 6 meeting, the words ‘rigorous and deliberate' were used. The Oct. 7 session was described as ‘comprehensive.' The Oct. 9 meeting, by contrast, turned out to be ‘robust.' The Oct. 14 meeting was described as ‘fairly comprehensive.' ”

“Maybe there is some rhyme or reason to deferring to Nancy Pelosi on the stimulus, to everyone on health care, and to the White House seminars on a war,” Jennifer Rubin writes for Commentary.

Filling the void — the national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, in a statement: “In Afghanistan, the extremists are sensing weakness and indecision within the U.S. government, which plays into their hands, as evidenced by the increased attacks in Afghanistan as well as Pakistan. I fear that an emboldened enemy will now intensify their efforts to kill more U.S. soldiers.”

From the other side: “Democratic and Republican politicians — and pundits — pressing Obama to render a decision now ought to back off. Obama is merely following the advice of these strategy experts: investing time and energy,” David Corn writes for Politics Daily.

Tea leaves — or just more leave? “In perhaps another sign of the improving security situation in Iraq, an Army brigade slated to replace a departing unit this January has received orders not to deploy, defense officials told ABC News,” Luis Martinez reports. “The move frees up an additional combat unit that could be sent to Afghanistan should the Obama administration decide that more troops are needed there as has been recommended by top U.S. military commanders.”

The broad challenge on health care — of speed, and of size: “Now the national terrain is thick with federal programs, and with state, county, city and town entities and programs, from coast to coast. It's not virgin territory anymore, it's crowded. We are a nation fully settled by government,” Peggy Noonan writes in her Wall Street Journal column. “But we know the price now. This is the historical context.”

More tales of speed — with rumbling felt on the left: “President Obama has not made significant progress in his plan to infuse federal courts with a new cadre of judges, and liberal activists are beginning to blame his administration for moving too tentatively on what they consider a key priority,” Michael Fletcher writes in The Washington Post. “During his first nine months in office, Obama has won confirmation in the Democratic-controlled Senate for just three of his 23 nominations for federal judgeships, largely because Republicans have used anonymous holds and filibuster threats to slow the proceedings to a crawl. But some Democrats attribute that GOP success partly to the administration's reluctance to fight, arguing that Obama's emphasis on easing partisan rancor over judgeships has backfired and only emboldened Senate Republicans.”

The president on Friday travels to College Station, Texas, for an event on service with former President George H.W. Bush — a first chapter in the 41-44 relationship.

“President Barack Obama, on his first foray into Texas as president today, will face a unique mixture of warm, fuzzy bipartisanship and bitter protest at Texas A&M University,” Todd J. Gillman writes for The Dallas Morning News. “Conservative activists from around the state, including members of the Tea Party movement that disrupted congressional town hall meetings this summer, plan to converge on campus to voice their displeasure with various Obama policies.”

“I cannot wait for President Obama to experience the open, decent, and welcoming Aggie spirit for himself,” Bush said in a letter to the A&M community, per ABC's Matt Jaffe.

On health care , enlisting a GOP governor… From the White House: “At 9:00am, Governor Jim Douglas of Vermont will hold a media availability at the stakeout location outside the James S. Brady press briefing room. The media availability will follow a meeting on pending health insurance reform legislation with Nancy-Ann DeParle, Director of the White House Office of Health Reform.”

The president is feisty, if not particularly rushed: “Grab a mop!” he demanded at a DNC fundraiser Thursday night in San Francisco, Jaffe reports. “Let's get to work!” (What's everyone been doing all year, then?)

Back on the Hill: “Voices were raised, people spoke passionately,” Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., told ABC's Z. Byron Wolf after Thursday's Senate Democratic caucus. “Unlike a lot of caucuses, this one proved to be rather interesting.”

Harry Reid's swarming caucus: “Like a cloud of mosquitoes, lawmakers are making their presence felt — claiming a central role in the debate and suggesting a variety of legislative provisions and concessions they would like in return for their support when a final vote is taken,” James Oliphant writes in the Los Angeles Times.

Numbers out Friday: “Congressional budget analysts have given House leaders cost estimates for two competing versions of their plan to overhaul the health-care system, concluding that one comes within striking distance of the $900 billion limit set by President Obama and the other falls below it,” Lori Montgomery writes in The Washington Post.

We've heard this before, and we'll hear it again: “The forces in favor of a public health insurance option roared back Thursday on Capitol Hill after weeks when their cause looked bleak,” Politico's Patrick O'Connor and Carrie Budoff Brown report. “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) looked closer than ever to including a robust U.S. government-run insurance program in the House bill . . . And in the Senate, a weekly policy lunch turned into a heated debate when liberals went after the Senate Finance Committee bill and made clear they won't roll over for legislation that doesn't include a public option.”

Capturing the left — if they can find the money: “Senate Democrats may widen insurance coverage in sweeping health legislation, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said Thursday, but they face a struggle to come up with ways to pay for the extra spending,” Greg Hitt of The Wall Street Journal writes.

Are any votes guaranteed? Without more individual choice, “the final bill is not going to have my support,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said on ABCNews.com's “Top Line” Thursday. Suggesting that the Finance Committee bill injects sufficient choice into the system, he said, is “not going to pass the smell test.”

That which doesn't kill a bill … Paul Krugman sees AHIP's push leading to stronger insurance exchanges — and, perhaps, a public option: “The insurance industry won't like these changes, but that matters less than it did a week ago,” Krugman writes in his New York Times column. “Even with stronger exchanges and a public option, health reform would probably increase, not reduce, insurance industry profits. But the insurers wanted it all. The good news is that by overreaching, they may have ensured that they won't get it.”

“The insurance lobby's hard-line tactics may give President Obama and his aides a convenient foil just when critics on their left flank are mobilizing for more-dramatic reforms. If those more liberal lawmakers get their way, the insurers could take some more hits,” Time's Michael Scherer and Jay Newton-Small report.

More noise from erstwhile allies: “When it comes to the health care battle, President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are learning that with friends like labor unions, they barely need Republicans to muck things up,” the AP's Alan Fram writes.

New from Health Care for America Now (already on the ad attacking new taxes on “Cadillac” plan): Another new ad campaign, this time making the case for a public option. “What's the real problem with health care costs? Lack of competition,” the TV ad says. “We need the choice of a public health insurance option.”

It all will come back to Reid: “He once made a name for himself there as an amateur boxer. But in what may be his biggest fight yet, Reid is playing referee,” NPR's David Welna reports.

Not the only key Democrat who's worried about reelection at the same time that he seeks to shepherd through a bill: “Two of the three Democrats charged with producing a Senate healthcare bill to take to the floor — Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut — face tough reelection bids in 2010,” Gail Russell Chaddock reports in the Christian Science Monitor. “Senate leaders are used to being lightening rods. But the overhaul of the US healthcare system sets up a perfect storm of competing interests, especially for Democrats.”

Self-preservation begins at home. ABC's Teddy Davis reports: “The Senate Majority Leader is launching two television ads a full 383 days before he faces the voters. Reid's campaign says that the ads were ‘long planned' to begin airing a year out from the election to introduce Reid to the 395,749 new voters registered in Nevada since his last election in 2004.”

Coming up on “This Week”: Senior White House adviser David Axelrod is George Stephanopoulos' exclusive guest. On the roundtable: George Will, Paul Krugman, Peggy Noonan, and E.J. Dionne Jr.

The old slogan was hard to remember, anyway. Sarah Palin has an op-ed in the new National Review, with the one-word headline: “Drill.” “The less use we make of our own reserves, the more we will have to import, which leads to a number of harmful consequences. That means we need to drill here and drill now,” she writes.

$4.4 million and counting, and counting: “The returns are in: Two words — ‘You lie!' — are worth roughly $2 million apiece,” The State's James Rosen reports. “Republican Rep. Joe Wilson and Democratic challenger Rob Miller raised a total of nearly $4.4 million through Sept. 30 in their 2nd Congressional District rematch. Fourteen months before voters go to the polls, the Wilson-Miller contest is already the richest U.S. House race ever in South Carolina.”

ACORN gets The New York Times take, by Jim Rutenberg: “The relationship between Democrats and Acorn has always been as productive as it has been uneasy. In Acorn's 40-year history, its voter registration drives and policy proposals on behalf of mostly poor and minority constituents have often redounded to the benefit of Democratic politicians and policy makers. But its hot rhetoric, frequently heavy-handed approach and occasional legal stumbles have just as often proved an alienating liability easily exploited by Republicans.”

More details on the “Goatee Gamble,” the NLCS bet between ABC's Jake Tapper and NBC's Chuck Todd. (Jake's Phillies took game one over Chuck's Dodgers, by a whisker or two.)

For the $1,000 opt-out donations (in lieu of either shaving or growing, as the case may be), Chuck has chosen Samaritan Inns, which provides housing and recovery services to homeless and addicted men and women. A secure donation can be made on their Website: http://www.samaritaninns.org/

Jake has picked Dr. Shershah Syed, an ob/gyn who has devoted himself to saving impoverished women in his native Pakistan from complications due to pregnancy such as fistulas. Syed is building a new maternity hospital and training midwives. Tax-deductible contributions can be made through Dr. Shershah Syed, c/o National Health Forum, P.O. Box 240093, St. Louis, MO 63024. Put: “Dr. Syed's project” in the subject line of the check. Email is nationalhealthforum@gmail.com. More on Syed's work in this New York Times column by Nicholas Kristof.

The Kicker:

“So I took a fun picture not thinking anything about what I was wearing but apparently anything other than a pantsuit I am a slut.” — Meghan McCain on the Twitter stir caused by a voluptuous photo she posted of herself.

“First of all, I did get elected president, so not everybody hates me.” — President Obama, answering a New Orleans boy's question of “why people hate you.”

For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note's blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/

‘Top Line’ — President Obama’s Blogger Problem

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: Disappointment from the “Netroots” has been an early and repeated theme of President Obama’s time in office, with sharp disagreements between the White House and the political left over such areas as health care, gay rights, Afghanistan, Iraq, and civil liberties.

Those tensions reached a new blogospheric boiling point over the weekend, after CNBC’s John Harwood quoted an anonymous White House adviser’s reaction to the “Internet left fringe.” The adviser, Harwood said, told him that “those bloggers need to take off the pajamas, get dressed and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.”

On ABCNews.com’s “Top Line” today, liberal blogger Jane Hamsher (not wearing pajamas) told us that the comment is emblematic of a White House that isn’t respecting the liberal activists who worked to elect Obama president. Many of those same liberals are dismayed to see a White House waffling in its commitment that a health care plan will include a “public option” to compete with private insurers.

“The White House very regularly calls bloggers ‘the left of the left,’ ignoring the fact that the majority of the country, 77 percent, wants a public option. This isn’t some fringe, lefty, loony thing,” said Hamsher, the founder of the liberal blog FireDogLake.

“[I]take it as a mark of pride for my profession that we’re being called Cheeto-eaters this morning,” Hamsher said. “We’re an independent political movement. We’re progressives, and progressives in the House are dismissed, progressives online are dismissed. You know, progressive values, progressive groups are only allowed access to the White House to the extent that they’re willing to torpedo progressive legislation.”

She added, “It’s not that we‘re some part of the Democratic Party that deserves respect. We’ve always had an independent political voice from the Democrats.”

Hamsher’s latest venture will test that proposition. Public Option Please is seeking to harness some of the same online energy that fueled Obama’s campaign to insist to lawmakers that a public option be included in a health care bill.

Marshall Ganz, a legendary figure in political organizing who helped design the Obama campaign’s field program in 2008, is helping Hamsher and her allies at Public Option Please find ways to make sure their voices are heard inside Washington.

“Ganz … said all along that Obama would not have been elected had he campaigned on politics of narrow self-interest,” Hamsher said. “And that that’s where the conversation about health care reform has taken place. We’re talking about bending the cost curve, and what we should be talking about is health care as a human right.”

“So we’re reaching out to young people, and trying to reach them through art, through music, you know, through other means to take hold and shape their own future,” she added. “And Obama, you know, sort of inspired that during the campaign, and then got into realpolitiks very fast. So that emotion had no place to go, and so we’re picking that up.”

Hamsher also promised to bring more pressure on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to bring a vote on the public option to the Senate floor: “This whole idea that they’re going to water down the public option so that they don’t put Democratic senators in the position of having to actually state that they will filibuster is ridiculous. No. If they’re going to filibuster, make them say so. Nobody will say so for a reason. It is unprecedented. So the idea that we’re just going to sell this out to keep them from that uncomfortable position is not going to happen. And Harry Reid needs to start taking people’s gavels away [stripping committee chairmen of their titles] if it does happen.”

Harwood’s reporting sparked widespread anger among liberal bloggers, and prompted the White House to do some damage control today.

White House deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer told Greg Sargent, of The Plum Line blog: “That sentiment does not reflect White House thinking at all, we’ve held easily a dozen calls with the progressive online community because we believe the online communities can often keep the focus on how policy will affect the American people rather than just the political back-and-forth.”

Click HERE for the full interview with Jane Hamsher.

We also checked in with Politico’s Ben Smith (another blogger who, for the record, joined us fully and well-dressed), on the insurance industry’s last-ditch attempt to scuttle a health care bill, and tomorrow’s critical vote in the Senate Finance Committee.

We also got into some handicapping of the mayoral race in New York City, where Democrats have been unable to muster much outrage against Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s attempt for a third term — a move that required him to get the City Council to toss out term limits for city officials.

Watch tht full interview with Ben Smith HERE.

Peace Group: If Obama Deserves Prize He Will Stop ‘Surge’ in Afghanistan

ABC News' Teddy Davis reports:

Peace Action, a liberal anti-war group, has issued a statement saying that if President Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize he will stop the “surge” in Afghanistan.

“It is ironic that this award comes on the same day that the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the administration is considering sending as many as 60,000 more troops to Afghanistan,” said Peace Action's executive director Kevin Martin.

“President Obama needs to prove that he really is a force for peace. He can do that by refusing to put more troops in Afghanistan, and instead committing to a non-military solution that doesn't destabilize a nuclear-armed Pakistan like a surge would,” the statement continues.

The group adds that the president is moving in the right direction on
nuclear disarmament but hasn't done “nearly enough” yet to warrant a Nobel Prize.

While Obama is being criticized by Peace Action on theleft, he is also being pummeled from the right.

“This little man child who has not done diddly squat,” said Rush Limbaugh on hisFriday radio show. “He knows exactly why he was given this award … man of peace not to … take on Iran!”

ABC News' Steve Portnoy contributed to this report.