Arizona Sen. John McCain speaks in Seattle at noon in what's being billed as a major foreign policy speech. He's appearing at a joint meeting of the Seattle City Club and the World Affairs Council.

He's not yet an official candidate for president, but it must be getting close.

Certainly the opposition is treating him as a candidate. State Democrats put out a release today saying "JOHN MCCAIN WORSE THAN GEORGE W. BUSH ON IRAQ."

And a liberal D.C. group, the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, has been promoting an on-line petition asking McCain to boycott the luncheon today because one of the co-sponsors is Seattle's Discovery Institute.

The Discovery Institute has been instrumental in promoting intelligent design and it has become the group's most prominent and controversial cause. Discovery is one of 10 groups listed as "co-presenting organizations" for today's meeting. Others include the Municipal League of King County and the University of Washington's Jackson School of International Studies.

DefCon, as the group calls itself, says Discovery is "responsible for spearheading the religious right's war on science education."

None of our elected officials should lend credence to this organization, especially a ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Last week, Think Progress described the event as McCain being "the keynote speaker for the most prominent creationism advocacy group in the country." Certainly Discovery would object to the use of "creationism" to describe intelligent design.

And that clearly overstates Discovery's role in today's event. I don't think the lunch has anything to with intelligent design. But no one should be surprised that McCain will be unconcerned about a connection to the Discovery Institute. He supports teaching ID in schools, something even the Discovery Institute claims it's not interested in. He appears to also support teaching creationism in schools along with evolution.

In 2005 McCain was asked about intelligent design during an editorial board interview with the Arizona Daily Star. You can find a video of this here at the paper's site. I watched it and made this transcript.

Q: Should intelligent design be taught in schools?

McCain: I think there have to be all points of view presented. But they've got to be thoroughly presented. And to say you can only teach one line of thinking ... or one belief, on how people and the world were created, I think, there's nothing wrong with teaching others schools of thought.

Q: Does it belong in science?

McCain: Well, there are enough scientists who believe that it does. I'm not a scientist. This is something that I think all points of view should be presented. We have never been exclusive in that.

Think Progress says that in 2006 McCain reversed himself and said it doesn't belong in science class. But that's a misreading of what McCain was reported to have said. The Aspen Times story cited shows the question McCain was asked was about creationism, not intelligent design.

In the final question of the evening, an audience member asked McCain to outline his stance on teaching evolution and creationism in schools.

"I think Americans should be exposed to every point of view," he said. "I happen to believe in evolution. ... I respect those who think the world was created in seven days. Should it be taught as a science class? Probably not."

More on McCain's visit:

The AP's Dave Ammons has the scoop today on Attorney General Rob McKenna's planned endorsement of McCain.

"John McCain is an impressive leader with a record of public service that's beyond reproach," McKenna said. "He understands the difficult challenges our country faces. He has the experience and fortitude to bring people together for solutions we need."

McKenna is the first statewide elected official in Washington to make an endorsement in the 2008 presidential campaign. It's interesting that he is getting so far out ahead, though if there is a frontrunner on the GOP side it'd have to be McCain. I think being an early adopter can bring McKenna some national attention.

In 2004 Congressman Adam Smith did well by being the first member of Congress to endorse John Kerry. Even though Kerry lost, and his reputation has not recovered, I don't see that Smith has been hurt, and at the time he looked smart for having early on picked his party's nominee.

Any Washington politicians signed up with any presidential candidates yet that I've missed? Let me know.

UPDATE: Adam Smith is an Obama backer. Smith spokesman Derrick Crowe
said the congressman met recently at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee with other House Democrats who have signed up with Obama's campaign and "he is on the team."