A year ago, illegal immigration stood out as the issue many of us feared would dominate the presidential campaign of 2008.  First, there was Congress, where fiery speeches and anti-immigrant rhetoric soared in a fierce debate on whether illegal immigrants should be allowed access to public housing.

Ali G. Scotten reported for National Iranian American Council (NIAC) on Feb. 14, 2008 that

The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) held a large event in the U.S. House of Representatives Tuesday as part of its lobbying effort to be removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. The event, which was organized by the MEK and sponsored by Representative Tom Tancredo’s (R-CO) Iran Human Rights and Democracy Caucus, invited Congressional staffers and members of the general public to learn about the organization’s activities.

There are times when life imitates satire. One happened recently when George Bush commented on his education policy, "Childrens do learn." Way back in April during the first Democratic presidential debate, Joe Biden, a man who is not known for his brevity, answered a question with a one word answer. Students of satire wait with baited breath for those moments when Hillary Clinton is warm and funny at the same moment, the powers that be in baseball show something that represents a backbone, and Paris Hilton turns down an opportunity to be photographed.

But I have left out one of the most absurd processes known to humanity: the Iowa Caucuses.

Whether you are a romantic or a cynic, I think you have to agree that the President of the United States holds a position of considerable influence and authority.

Given it’s importance, shouldn’t the first formal step in the election process be a sane one?

Of course it should.

Is it?

Of course not. Exhibit A: the Iowa Caucuses.

One of the best diaries I have read here, http://www.dailykos.com/...
discusses Senator Edwards' angry comments on the fact that an insurance company, CIGNA, and not doctors and nurses, got to decide how to treat Nataline Sarkysian who, as a result, died.  Congress was not rushed back into session, the President was not returned from his "working vacation" to sign emergency legislation, and a living human being died instead of receiving treatment---a liver transplant---which might have saved her life.

But according to the people running for the Republican party nomination for President, the leading issue in the campaign is immigration "reform."  Not Iraq, not the fact that we may be on the verge of incinerating ourselves, not an educational system that does not prepare our children for the future, and instead is told they have to teach bible stories as equally likely to scientific knowledge about evolution, not a transportation system crumbling into obsolescence, not a growing inequality of haves and have nots, but immigration reform.

It's been a bad week for also-rans. Putin outwits pundits as "Person of the Year" so says TIME magazine. Heloise says: WTF? The pundits said it should have been Petraeus. At least. Look at the muck and excitement Petraeus generated for weeks. But Putin? Maybe they think he is about to turn Hitlerean on them. Or are they playing the "1960's cold war card?" Thinking that if they talk Putin up enough he will go "newclarr" on them?

Tom tanks and then endorses Mitt because he is more pro-illegal alien legislation.

There's been a lot of talk about what the republicans may or may not say about this candidate or the other.  Here is my take on the whole thing.

Because I have a strange sense of what a good time is, I recently spent 36 hours mocking up roughly 10 campaign ads, supporting a variety of candidates. The thirty-second spots, by and large, fit the mold of traditional campaign ads... selected speech excerpts remixed to address a key narrative point, unobtrusive background music, text, maybe some photos, maybe some video.

Below is an example of of a support ad I put together for Sen. Dodd using a traditional approach:

After the jump, I will post three similarly styled ads for Edwards, Obama, and Biden, that were completed during this 36 hour period, and two less conventional support ads for Dodd and Tancredo.

after watching and listening to the Republican debate this week, I want to revisit an issue on which I took some flak before.   After the Virginia elections I commented in a number of places, including one of my own diaries, that I expected we should expect to continue to see the Republicans attack on immigration.  In Some good news from Virginia, written on election night, I noted

Now the bad news.   It looks like the attacks on illegal immigration had some salience, especially in Prince William County.   Thus I expect to see Republicans across the country start trying to use this as a weapon.

 And in comments on that thread and elsewhere I pointed out that things like the races in Prince William County and a few other places would give some Republicans hope that the issue of immigration could still serve as a magic bullet.