It's been said that good artists copy and great artists steal. I make no claims of greatness, at least none that I've told you, but I'm going to swipe a sentiment from Kip at A Stitch in Haste. He's a New Yorker and has discussed Hillary Clinton's upcoming Senate re-election campaign and how that ties into her presumed presidential run in 2008. On the issue he has this to say:

But there’s that problematic 2008 presidential election again. Is it fair, honest and ethical to run for a six-year Senate term if you know that you’re running for President starting almost the day you’re sworn in?

The short answer is: well yes it’s ethical if New Yorkers decide that it’s ethical. If she is open and forthright about her plans, and New Yorkers say “fine by us,” then who is anyone else to say such maneuvers are wrong?

But the key words are “open and forthright.” Clinton should be nailed down, precisely and unequivocally, on this question during her Senate re-election campaign: Is she or is she not running for President in 2008? (Also, would she accept the Vice President nomination if it played out that way?).

No “maybes.” No “I have no plans.” No “It’s premature for that.” Yes or no -- is she running?

I'd like to apply that standard to Senator George Allen as he prepares his Senate re-election campaign with ongoing journeys to New Hampshire. Like Kip with respect to Senator Clinton, I don't necessarily have an issue with Senator Allen running for president while he is our senator. I do think he should state in next year's campaign if he only intends to serve one-third of his term. What's it going to be, Senator?

The case of Senator Allen is insightful for an additional reason. Most people paying attention to Virginia politics assumed that Governor Mark Warner would run for Senator Allen's seat next year to gain exposure for his expected run for the presidency in 2008. In August Gov. Warner announced that he will not run for the Senate. So, is it any shock that Gov. Warner is launching a political action committee to test the presidential waters? (Source) The website is in development stages, so the story is technically breaking the news, but the article's self-satisfaction feels overblown. Consider:

A backdoor into Virginia Governor Mark Warner's soon-to-be-launched political action committee website reveals the popular Virginia Democrat is likely plotting a campaign for president in 2008 -- and is already comparing his site to that of other expected presidential contenders, RAW STORY can reveal.
...

Warner's pre-launch site unwittingly became public because there was no password restriction on the development site. It provides an unprecedented look at how campaigns begin -- containing notes on other presidential contender's sites as well as comparisons to other big mainstream sites like Sports Illustrated, and numerous references to NASCAR. The publicly available site has been taken down; it was previously at http://forwardtogetherpac.cat4dev.com/.

The site lauds the sites of nearly every other known presidential contender -- including Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).

The comparisons to Sports Illustrated and other sites should've put a damper on the "caught you" mentality running through the rest of the article, but it didn't. Gov. Warner might run for president. Big deal. That's not surprising, as the article so helpfully highlights. So it's interesting to read through the rest, only to discover the basic idea that the notes commenting so favorably on other sites appear to originate within the web development firm designing the site. That defeats the purpose of the "caught you", though, so it's buried into the end as an implication.

As a software developer familiar with coding, whether web-based or not, I feel confident to explain those notes the same way I opened this post. Very few websites are innovative or different now. The Internets are mature enough that everyone has a website. There are enough site designs to steal from that intellectually lazy developers will look to examples to "inspire" them. (The template for Rolling Doughnut comes standard with Movable Type, in case you need proof.) So the developers' comments indicate no real insight into Gov. Warner's thinking, just the random thought process of a room full of coders. Pretend that a bunch of monkeys in a room in hell Charlottesville are plotting Gov. Warner's political strategy, if you like, but I'm sure you'd be wrong. I have no other confirmation for that than what I can deduce from the linked article, but I'm confident enough in my analysis, through experience, that I'd bet a day's pay on it.

Which leads me back to my original point. Gov. Warner wants to be president and his web development team, most likely contractors, left his website (unintentionally, I assume) open to the world. Big deal. How does this give any insight into anything? Gov. Warner already announced he's not running for the Senate. If he wants to spend his next three years as a private citizen, with a large personal bank account to fund those activities, running for president, at least he's being transparent in his public actions. Can Senator Allen say the same?

Post Script: I'm in no way endorsing or condemning a Warner campaign for president. Unless he's running against Senator Allen, of course. I'll make that endorsement now. Otherwise, I'm waiting until a libertarian shows up in 2008.