Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Paul Kane, washingtonpost.com's congressional blogger, was online Wednesday, Feb. 28, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

Read Paul Kane's blog, Capitol Briefing

Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Paul Kane: Hello gang, it's the last day of February 2007, so I assume you're all concerned about the legislative issues of the day, the upcoming baseball season and the fact that Tiger Woods will be on Capitol Hill next week to hype his new DC-based tournament. Right? No one cares about the presidential campaign that is still 11 months away before a single primary vote is cast. And no one cares about the war still raging half-a-world away. Yep, as usual, I'm wrong, based on a quick sampling of the questions already filed. Let's have fun, I've got the Starbucks coffee sitting by my desk, the iPod's running and I'm not being paid a single dime for product placement. Let's get started!

_______________________

Houston: Paul, I don't know if you watched Bob Woodruff last night on "To Iraq and Back," but I went to bed crying. Then I woke up to Don Imus this morning interviewing John McCain regarding the horrible situation with the VA in the way our troops are being taken care of -- where is the outrage!? Don Imus was very light, to say the least, with John McCain stumbling around how they will have "hearings" -- and we all know where those "hearings" will go - absolutely nowhere! John McCain being a Vietnam vet should be banging doors down around there. Where is his outrage? His "Maverick" status is long gone with his Presidential wishes! How do you see this?

Paul Kane: I didn't see the entire Woodruff piece last night, but did catch the first 15 minutes and last 15 minutes. It was raw, it was moving, it was powerful. What made it so moving was the latter half of the show, where he transitioned it into a contrast -- of how he received such incredible care and how, in many ways, he had access to better care than other just-as-injured veterans suffering brain injuries, because they and their families live in somewhat remote corners of the nation. While it was on a slightly different topic, it was for TV as moving a portrait of the care of our veterans as the pieces written recently in The Washington Post by Dana Priest and Anne Hull on Walter Reed.

Sen. McCain is in a tough bind as a war supporter, but as someone who relied on the VA to heal his own wounds from 30-some years ago, let's all hope for the sake of today's veterans that McCain leads a charge to make sure they get the best care possible, politics be damned.

_______________________

Rolla, Mo.: The Post article accompanying the new poll results on the 2008 race noted Mitt Romney at 4 percent, then said nothing else about him. I guess that speaks for itself?

washingtonpost.com: Washington Post-ABC News Poll Data (washingtonpost.com, Feb. 27)

Paul Kane: Romney's not worried about this early polling because he knows his name recognition is not widespread across the nation. He's trying to gin up support solely in the early primary states and with conservative grassroots -- if and when his numbers surge in those states, then they believe folks in the remaining corners of the national GOP primary electorate will pay attention. Think about what John Edwards did in 2004: at this time in 2003, he probably was at about 4 percent, and he ended being the last guy standing next to John Kerry. Romney hopes for a similar -- but better, obviously -- performance.

_______________________

Louisbusrg, N.C.: In reading your blog I see that Nancy Pelosi has a very high favorable rating despite the fact of Cheney's continual attacks on her patriotism. Hmmm -- all of the Dem presidential candidates will be lining up to see when it is their turn. "Hey Dick -- over here, Dick." "My turn, Dick." "Dick, you got a minute?" "Dick, Carl Levin isn't even running for office, how about me?"

washingtonpost.com: Among Liberals, Pelosi More Popular Than Congress (washingtonpost.com, Feb. 26)

Paul Kane: (Note: I'm a sucker to take any question in which you actually reference my blog!)

The recent Post-ABC News poll was so chock-full of information it's insane. Because I'm a Hill-o-phile (as in the Capitol, not the N.Y. Senator), I picked off the Pelosi numbers to see where she stands now. Last year the GOP spent a lot of energy trying to demonize her, to make candidates scared to run with her as their future speaker, to divide the party.

Quite simply, it hasn't worked. Pelosi is at 50-31 fav/unfav in terms of her job performance. At this point 12 years ago Newt Gingrich already had 48 percent of the nation disapproving of his performance. Things could change, but for now Pelosi remains favorable to all corners of the country, and attacks like those by Cheney simply have yet to take hold.

_______________________

Baltimore: John McCain's presidential campaign seems to be floundering -- every day brings another "McCain is toast" story, while Rudy rides a wave of public support. Do you expect McCain to change his ways?

Paul Kane: John McCain is basing his entire candidacy on one inherent value: his authenticity. He came out of his 2000 campaign saying his only regret was that he didn't truthfully attack the South Carolina flag issue and instead went with political expediency. If you start to see McCain waiver on issues -- issues that truly are essential to his campaign -- then expect to see his campaign to head into a downward spiral.

_______________________

Atlanta: A month ago I sent a comment to Sen. Hagel's Senate Web site. I don't live in Nebraska, so wasn't expecting reply. In the past two days I've received four e-mails from his PAC with excerpts from interviews with Hagel framing his positions. I think Hagel has a major announcement coming soon.

Paul Kane: Hmmm, very interesting. Hagel's in a very interesting spot. I personally believe there is a large chunk of conservative voters out there who are highly opposed to the war -- just look at the makeup of the districts of the 17 Republicans who voted with Pelosi and Co. on the surge disapproval resolution. We'll see with Hagel. The dynamics of today's primary system make it very difficult for late-breaking insurgency campaigns that hasn't been mapped out methodically. In a GOP primary, I'm not sure Hagel could navigate those waters to the nomination, but he could play a huge spoiler role. ... Now, on the other hand, there's that Unity '08 group that David Broder wrote about this past Sunday. That'd be fun with Hagel.

_______________________

Indiana: Paul, what is going to happen with Rahm Emanuel? Can he become Speaker before he turns sixty or after it?

Paul Kane: Rahm is 47, I think -- that gives him 13 years to become speaker. I'm taking the under on that bet, folks. My personal expertise is in the Senate, but the past 2 months I've covered the House very closely. Assuming Nancy Pelosi has a reasonably long run as speaker -- four, five years or more -- her most likely successor becomes Rahm. One more reason to be jealous of him: he made something like $16 million in investment banking in a couple years from the Clinton White House to the people's House. He can afford to this politics stuff the rest of his life. It's his world, we're all living in it.

_______________________

Matawan, N.J.: Mr. Kane: Why do you think the coverage of the battles raging in Iraq and Afghanistan is so limited regarding the images we see? The gruesome devastation seems sanitized to avoid strong public awareness. I mean this is about young Americans willing to sacrifice their lives and limbs, not about political posturing and pundit predictions, isn't it?

Paul Kane: I can only guess this based on what I know from reporters who've been to Iraq. They simply aren't in a safe enough place in order to venture into the battlefields to film and document the "devastation" you're talking about. Unlike most previous wars, this one makes no distinction between actual soldiers and journalists -- we are targets as well. And I'm not talking about folks like Bob Woodruff, who was riding with soldiers when they got hit with an IED. Jill Carroll was set up by insurgents, pulled out of a car, watched her friend/interpreter get shot and killed in front of her, then was held hostage for more than 80 days. Faced with those conditions, it's difficult for my journalist brethren to show what's truly going on over there. I'm sorry, but our lives and limbs are on the line, too.

_______________________

RE: Byrd To Take Center Stage...: On a recent blog you reported that Byrd was about to take center stage. Indeed, as reported by The Washington Post, Byrd did. While Byrd gave a speech saying the Bush Administration did not want even to try diplomacy, as The Washington Post reported, the Bush Administration announced it was going to indeed try diplomacy. Do you think this was deliberate to get Byrd off the center stage?

washingtonpost.com: Byrd to Take Center Stage in Iraq Debate (washingtonpost.com, Feb. 24)

Paul Kane: I doubt that was done to specifically trump Byrd, but the timing of the announcement -- in front of a high-profile Senate panel -- certainly was a well-thought-out message strategy. I was out sick yesterday so, sadly, I missed the hearing. (If I'd signed up for Comcast digital, I probably could have watched it on C-SPAN-19 or however many they offer now, but that's another story. Anyone with DVR -- tape "Lost" for me tonight, in case I miss it, please.)

_______________________

Midwest: Kudos to Sen. Kerry for confronting Belgian ambassador nominee Sam Fox regarding his $50,000 contribution to the Swift Boat ad campaign. Fox's answers were less than adequate. And good for Sen. Obama for following up on Kerry's tough questions.

washingtonpost.com: Kerry Puts GOP Donor On Defensive (Post, Feb. 28)

Paul Kane: This is an issue Kerry isn't letting go away. Clearly, he wishes he handled this differently in his '04 campaign, but, even more clearly he realizes he wants to completely refute these allegations to ensure his own lasting legacy as a war hero who deserved his awards. That's why there is pending litigation on this matter still. Keep watching.

_______________________

Washington: Can you tell me where the minimum wage increase bill is right now in the legislative process? My recollection is it passed House then Senate (with tax cuts attached) and then the House then passed it with the tax cut attached. Where is it now and what is the means that likely will be used to get it passed? Will a straight up/down vote with the latest House small tax cut make it past the Senate (where it passed with large margin 80-plus if I recall correctly)?

Paul Kane: Ah, a domestic policy question. Think this is the only one in the field. The questioner is right in terms of the process so far, each chamber has passed the bill -- the House passing two bills, the min wage and the tax portion. The bill must go to a House-Senate conference, but my expectation is that it should emerge sometime in the early spring and go to both chambers for final passage. Unless there's a major hiccup, I think you should expect this to pass overwhelmingly just before the spring recess (March 30-April 9) or sometime in April. Look for a post next week on Capitol Briefing updating where the minimum wage bill is.

_______________________

Rolla, Mo.: I am pleasantly surprised that the public seems to be ahead of the MSM and Congress over the past few months. The latest example is the media and congress dumping on the "Murtha Plan" when a public opinion poll that doesn't mention his name shows significant support for its provisions. Why do those inside the Beltway not grasp the desire to get out of Iraq in the rest of the country?

Paul Kane: This is a fascinating question, because right now 56 percent of the House and 56 percent of the Senate have voted against the surge -- 246 members of the House equals 56 percent and change, and 56 senators have voted in procedural votes in favor of a resolution disapproving of the surge. Yet, as our poll showed yesterday, an even stronger percentage of the public -- 66-67 percent -- oppose the surge. In economics, this would make Congress a lagging indicator of public opinion. And I think, in reality, that's probably what the Founding Fathers intended.

_______________________

Wilmington, N.C.: Please give me your thoughts on Unity08.

Paul Kane: Unity08 is a fascinating concept about finding a nonpartisan figure to run for president -- or to create a bipartisan ticket of a Democrat and a Republican. The problem with this and previous efforts at third-party movements is that it's a top-down mentality, not something that is building from the ground up. Lincoln and the Republicans actually had members in Congress, got them elected in 1852, '54, '56, '58, before they put one of their own in the White House. True-blue third-party movements need to start from the bottom, or else they become the captive of the cult of personality of whomever that one presidential nominee is. (Does anyone even remember that Pat Buchanan actually ran on the general election ticket in 2000 on Ross Perot's Reform Party? No. Because that party was seen solely as Ross Perot's and no one else's.)

_______________________

Anonymous: The fair and balanced folks at Fox News, at least those on Fox and Friends, seem to be attributing a lot of progress to the troop surge. What are the numbers now versus before? Are others also crediting the surge with noticeable progress already?

Paul Kane: I think most reporting you've seen the past few weeks has been that things on the ground are in fact better now than they've been in a long, long time in Baghdad. To attribute this all to the surge is something that even Dr. Rice and Gen. Pace probably wouldn't agree with, as the Sadr Army generally is standing down in the hopes that the U.S. troop surge will come in and wipe out their Sunni rivals.

_______________________

Anonymous: Pending litigation on Kerry vs. Swiftboaters? Do tell.

Paul Kane: Here's an AP story on Kerry's defense fund. Fun stuff.

_______________________

Philadelphia: Right now, the Republican Party is a conservative party without a clear conservative choice for president. Huckabee and Brownback don't seem likely to become top contenders. McCain and Giuliani poll well, but both have problems that may make them impossible for many conservatives to support. Romney seems barely viable, and is being hammered as a flip-flopper. Who are conservatives on The Hill backing?

Paul Kane: OK, I'm also a sucker for "Philadelphia"-based questions. I'm surprised anyone in the City of Brotherly Love has any time to think about politics globally, what with a mayoral race going on there as well as the ongoing Andy Reid family saga.

The conservatives on the Hill so far are completely dividing up across the spectrum. The Fix and Capitol Briefing have been documenting the endorsements so far, so check out those blogs. McCain's getting the most support among Senators, but Romney's pulling the most on the House side.

_______________________

Washington: Hi Mr. Kane! Any update on Steny Hoyer's five-day work week? Has the House actually met for a full five-day week so far this year?And where does the 100-hour agenda stand right now? Are all those House bills stranded in the Senate? Thanks!

Paul Kane: Um, yeah ... five days ... well, um, let me speak for the tired and overworked press corps of the Capitol: we never signed on to any five-day-a-week pledge, so we have nooooo problem if he isn't living up to the pledge. No problem at all, Steny!

We'll keep writing glowing profiles of you if you don't do the five-day thing, I swear! (That was a joke, folks, a joke.)

So far there's been one five-day week, and that wasn't really a five-day week -- it was the week of the Iraq resolution debate. There was a vote on Monday night, then generally three days of debate, and a vote on Friday.

_______________________

Vienna, Va.: Are there any other controversial votes that HRC has been involved in, besides her war authorization vote, that could get her into trouble?

Paul Kane: HRC has plenty of votes that can be used against her, for her, or all over the map regarding her. She's voted on the Patriot Act -- once its inception in '01, and again in '05. She's voted on stem cell research. She's voted on flag burning. Depending on where you are on those issues, there's plenty to be used for or against her. That's the danger of being a U.S. Senator and running for the White House, folks.

_______________________

Paul Kane: Alright, folks, my clock says 12:01 p.m. Time for me to sign off and get back to work. The blog kicks off a new, semi-regular feature tomorrow: Meet the New Bosses. With all respect to The Who, that's what I'm calling it -- not sure if that's the official name or not -- but it's a semi-regular, probably every-other-week look at the new chairmen of the committees. First up: John Spratt, chairman of the House Budget Committee. He's the guy responsible for infuriating everyone in the Democratic Party by balancing the budget in five years -- and cutting lots of programs favorable to Democratic constituencies. Check in, it'll be a fun feature. Look forward to our next chat.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.