A pump provides a supply of morphine to Larrey Anderson's spine, injured in a bizarre accident more than 20 years ago.

Anderson takes, he is quick and pleased to say, one-three hundredth of his old dosage. The morphine does not eliminate the pain, but eases it enough to allow the former state senator to write. To sign copies of his new novel.

And to talk. The other day, we spent more than hour talking about writing, about national politics, about philosophy, about his recovery. The only topic off limits was local politics; "I'd really rather not talk about it." Which, after three weeks of endorsement interviews with legislative and county candidates, was fine by me.

Sometimes, the headlines say it all.

From a Rep. Bill Sali press release this afternoon:

"DEMOCRATS STICK TAXPAYERS WITH $300 BILLION ILL-CONCEIVED HOUSING BAILOUT"

From a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release this afternoon:

"Representative Bill Sali Votes Against Middle Class Families Facing Foreclosure"

Scroll down for the rest.

Sali press release:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Bill Sali today voted against legislation providing a $300 billion housing bailout for those unable or unwilling to make their mortgage payments. “Idahoans’ hard earned money shouldn’t be used to pay for the bad judgment of those financially unprepared to take on the responsibility of home ownership,” Sali said.

Sen. Mike Crapo's Owyhee wilderness bill headed for a possible Senate vote in June. (Click here for the story, and here for the Crapo press release).

With that news, here's where the candidates in Idaho's contested May 27 Senate and congressional primaries stand on Idaho's wilderness bills — the Owyhee bill, and Rep. Mike Simpson's Boulder-White Clouds bill.

U.S. Senate, Republicans:

• Fred Adams, Idaho Falls. Opposes new wilderness bills.

Julie Ellsworth — the legislator-turned-lobbyist-turned-legislative candidate — bristled when I asked her about her recent lobbying history.

The media, she said, had a "field day" with her lobbying work, she said during a meeting with our editorial board. She then suggested her Republican opponent, Gail Hartnett, is a lobbyist herself. Calmly (and accurately), Hartnett pointed out that she is not a registered lobbyist.

Ellsworth shouldn't be surprised that we wanted to ask her about her lobbying work during our endorsement interview. The Boise Republican, who served in the House from 1997 to 2006, has become something of an Exhibit A in the debate over lobbying reform.

Add Rep. Mike Simpson to the list of debate no-shows.

The 2nd District congressman has backed out of a live televised debate on Sunday, May 18, sponsored by Idaho Public Television, the League of Women Voters and the Idaho Press Club.

With Simpson saying no to the May 18 date, the debate is in limbo. Only one of Simpson's two GOP opponents, Gregory Nemitz of Twin Falls, meets the sponsors' criteria of running an active campaign. A debate will be held only if two or more candidates commit to attend.

Simpson's cancellation has to do only with logistics, spokeswoman Nikki Watts said today. Simpson is scheduled to speak on May 18 at the Idaho Conservation League's Wild Idaho conference at Redfish Lake Lodge. With votes scheduled on the House floor on Monday, May 19, Simpson is scheduled to fly from Idaho Falls to Washington, D.C., that morning. "Congress' schedule is not quite as forgiving as it is in the general."

Scott Syme has no endorsements, little name recognition and, through March 31, his campaign had raised $42,365 and had a paltry $5,929 on hand.

By contrast, Lt. Gov. Jim Risch has the endorsements of many key Republicans (his campaign co-chairs are Sen. Mike Crapo and former Gov. Phil Batt). He has the name recognition that comes with nearly three decades of public service, including a seven-month run as governor. His fund-raising numbers: He has raised more than $1.1 million and has nearly $936,000 on hand.

So what, exactly, is Syme's business model, as he hopes to pull an upset in the May 27 GOP primary?

I'm always suspicious when candidates start shopping for debates — and a format they like.

And that's what Lt. Gov. Jim Risch is doing this spring, as he picks a KTVB debate with his fellow Republican candidates for U.S. Senate over the traditional, statewide Idaho Public Television debates.

Risch will participate in a May 14 KTVB debate, but he'll skip the Public Television debate on May 22.

Here's what Jason Risch — chairman of the Risch for Senate campaign, and the candidate's son — said in a letter to Elinor Chehey of the League of Women Voters (Scroll down for the full text):

The dam breaching debate has hit a standstill in the Northwest, partly because Idaho politicians have been unwilling to support a step that may give Idaho salmon their best and only shot at recovery.

Instead, Idaho politicians have parroted the downstream company line, defending the dams.

The debate has to change sometime, one candidate at a time, and is a breakthrough in Idaho's 2nd Congressional District. Democratic candidate David Sneddon says he supports breaching the eastern Washington dams, saying a free-flowing river system is "necessary" to help Idaho salmon migrate to the Pacific Ocean and back.

Here it is, ripped from today's headlines, as the saying goes.

"Radioactive Sand Beach Blanket Bingo."

Annette Funicello. Hermit crabs big as Hummers. Screenplay basically writes itself.

I'm a couple days behind on this, but I wanted to follow on a follow to my earlier post about civility and anonymity in the blogosphere.

An excellent point here from an anonymous, but good, local blog, the unequivocal notion.

I'm kinda/sorta anonymous, a lot of people know who I am, but most don't. I don't take a lot of steps to protect it, but I don't advertise it either. I just don't think that who I am has that much bearing on what I write about -- that and death threats (yep, it has happened) really aren't that cool either. But there are a few bloggers in Idaho who require anonymity to write, that's just the nature of our state and what they write about. Do they deserve any less credibility? I don't think so. I think they bring insight into subjects that the rest of us don't have; they have credibility in my eyes because I choose to give it to them.