SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: calgal who wrote (471110)10/4/2003 8:44:07 PM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
White House Credibility Attacked
Democratic Hopefuls Cite Iraq, Leak of CIA Operative's N



By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 4, 2003; Page A04

Democratic presidential candidates and congressional leaders, reflecting their growing belief that President Bush can be ousted in 2004 if voters lose faith in his words and policies, yesterday harshly questioned the honesty and competence of a White House facing its biggest controversies to date.

At a Democratic National Committee meeting in Washington, several of the party's candidates and top lawmakers blamed Bush for the recent spate of bad news: the rising number of Americans living in poverty and without health insurance, reports that inspectors found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and allegations that Bush aides leaked the name of a CIA operative to retaliate against a critic of the Iraq war.

In the day's sharpest attack, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) accused Bush of deceiving Americans over everything from national security to helping the poor. "There has been one value repeatedly missing from this presidency, and that value is integrity," Lieberman said. "By deception and disarray, this White House has betrayed the just cause of fighting terrorism and tyranny around the world." Leaking the CIA employee's name "was the politics of personal destruction at its worst," he said.

Polls show Bush still gets high marks for integrity and honesty.

Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) said Democrats "will not quit" pushing the leak matter "until people are brought to justice." The crowd erupted in applause.

Nearly 500 of the party's most committed activists have gathered for three days of meetings and to take another look at the 10 presidential hopefuls auditioning for their support. With the exception of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who let loose on his rivals (though never by name), the candidates who spoke yesterday spent most of their time bashing Bush. In a departure from the DNC's meeting six months ago, each candidate who spoke -- former Vermont governor Howard Dean, retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio), former senator Carol Moseley Braun, Kerry and Lieberman -- treated Bush's handling of Iraq as among his biggest liabilities.

The latest reason: a New York Times/CBS News poll that found support for Bush's Iraq policy slipping to all-time lows. "We are witnessing the beginning of the end of the Bush presidency," Kerry said.

Clark, whom many Democrats came to scrutinize not only for his ideas but his commitment to the party, spent several minutes insisting he shared their political values. Clark, who entered the race last week, said he supported organized labor, education, the environment, health care and abortion rights.

"If that ain't a Democrat, then I must be at the wrong meeting," he said. He said he has campaigned, raised money and voted for Democrats, including Al Gore in 2000.

Clark, speaking later at the Military Reporters and Editors conference in Arlington, called for an independent commission to investigate the administration's handling of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq and the alleged leak of the CIA operative's name.

"Nothing could be a more serious violation of the public trust than to consciously make a case for war based on false claims," Clark said.

Dean emphasized that he has raised $25 million so far, tops among the Democratic candidates. He noted that it came from 200,000 donors. Dean said that if Bush and his staff were "real patriots," they would acknowledge how they "misled us on the way into Iraq" and demand the resignation of whoever leaked the CIA operative's name.

Dean also offered a warning about the upcoming elections. "We are not out of power in the White House and Senate and the Congress because George Bush ran a great campaign," he said. "We're out of power . . . because we didn't stand up for what we believe in."

Republicans said such criticism will backfire. "They have come to the conclusion that it's in their short-term political interests to adopt this political hate speech," said Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie. "It's not in their long-term interest, which is fine by me."

Kerry used much of his speech to take shots at his rivals. He talked about fighting for the Democratic Party for decades, a slap at Clark, who announced he was a Democrat last month and attended a GOP fundraiser as recently as 2001.

Kucinich, who drew several supporters to the meeting, continued his calls for the United States to pull out of Iraq, while Braun insisted she was "in it to win it" despite raising scant money and polling in low single digits in most polls.

Lieberman, like others, happily highlighted reports that Arnold Schwarzenegger improperly touched women and that conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh is under investigation for possibly buying illegal drugs.

"After reading the paper this morning about the pill-popping, skirt-chasing and Hitler-praising, it would be very tempting to point out Republican hypocrisy on values," Lieberman said. "But would that be the right thing to do? Absolutely." Schwarzenegger has been accused of making positive comments about Adolf Hitler in 1975.

The other four presidential candidates will address the DNC today.

Staff writer Vernon Loeb contributed to this report.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company



To: calgal who wrote (471110)10/4/2003 8:56:32 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Respond to of 769670
 
If we could have simply put up a fence to keep out the subhuman terrorists of 91101, we wouldn't have cared a wit if Israel didn't like it. Powell is in serious danger of being eaten alive by the realities of the ME, like so many naive Americans before him...



To: calgal who wrote (471110)10/4/2003 8:57:30 PM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
ESPN = P.C.
Brent Bozell (archive)

October 3, 2003 | Print | Send

The media frenzy that pressed Rush Limbaugh's resignation from ESPN's NFL pregame show has been amazingly intense when compared to what was actually said. The entire sports/political culture ought to take a deep breath … and relax.

Rush said that he thought Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb has always been overrated because liberal sports reporters are blinded by a desire to see a black quarterback succeed. Forget the first part of this statement: Many (including me) would disagree that McNabb has been overrated. If Rush had said only that, he would have triggered a good old ESPN shouting match, presumably what he was being paid to do.

It was the second part -- the media are rooting for McNabb to succeed because he's black -- that did him in. Typical of the ensuing firestorm was this comment from Sports Illustrated's Roy Johnson, who told CBS: "To say that there's a social concern and a belief to want black quarterbacks to do well is ludicrous."

Ludicrous ? What's ludicrous is the denial.

Of course there is a social concern to see blacks break sports barriers, and it's laughable to pretend otherwise. Would Tiger Woods' arrival on the golf scene have garnered one-tenth the publicity were he white? Sports writers nationwide chased him with notebooks and microphones from Stanford straight into the PGA because he was making history, and they openly applauded the achievement. Who would try to deny that the same sentiment could be found with the ascent of tennis superstars Venus and Serena Williams from their poor and humble beginnings? To deny that our sports media -- along with the public -- cheer for black progress and greater black representation at the top of sports is folly.

And the same can be found in football. There are countless examples -- we've all heard them -- of commentators, columnists and editorial writers agitating for more black coaches and quarterbacks in the NFL. Last Jan. 8, New York Times columnist Selena Roberts did precisely that: "Didn't Michael Vick decode the Falcons' system ahead of the normal curve? Didn't Donovan McNabb prove he would decipher defenses from the Eagles' pocket after he broke a spoke on his ankle? Hasn't Steve McNair managed to outsmart defenders despite missing Titans practices because of pain? As the playoffs have revealed, there's progress, but so little change. There are proven black quarterbacks and coaches, but race relations are running a reverse in the NFL."

Maybe that wasn't what got Rush in trouble. Maybe it was that he had the temerity to slam the "liberal" sports writers. But again Rush makes a defensible point: many sports writers are liberal and use their sports forums to agitate politically.

After New York Times columnist Roberts finished praising the prowess of Vick, McNabb and McNair, she turned her guns on NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, who she dismissed as hopelessly white ("as culturally hip as Pat Boone"); stated the NFL "is still as white as baking soda while teams ponder their openings;" and accused the owners of using "Trent Lott logic; just because you say ‘what up, homey' doesn't mean you're inclusive." If that's not liberal-think, what is it?

Washington Post columnist Michael Wilbon is a great read on his sports page, great entertainment on TV and also regularly liberal politically in his sports reports. In 1995, Wilbon cheered NFL star Kellen Winslow when he entered the Hall of Fame with a political speech attacking Justice Clarence Thomas for opposing racial quotas and "barring the government from doing the right thing." Wrote Wilbon: "Winslow can be my Gipper any day. My hands are still raw from the applause." Wilbon even cheered the arrival of black sports stars at Louis Farrakhan's "Million Man March," and said of this spewing preacher and racist, anti-Semitic and America-hating bilge: "So much of Farrakhan's message was necessary and correct." None of this stopped ESPN from hiring Wilbon for its daily show "Pardon the Interruption."

One wishes Rush had explained himself better. Maybe it would have mollified his critics had he explained that it is also in the conservative impulse to cheer the achievements of barrier-breaking blacks, so long as the achievement is real (Woods, Williams sisters) and not construed (in Rush's analysis, McNabb). But that's the stuff of three-hour radio talk show discussions, not seven-second TV soundbites. That mistake, coupled with the media's unwavering commitment to political correctness, is what spurred ESPN to grow queasy and hush Rush.

Brent Bozell is President of Media Research Center, a TownHall.com member group.

©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.



To: calgal who wrote (471110)10/4/2003 8:57:56 PM
From: Cyprian  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
hi Westi.

What is your opinion on the fence in Israel, and Powell's opinion?

i believe that israel has a right to build a fence around their country should they deem it necessary, as long as it remains in the territory of israel. i do not believe israel has any right to build a fence that extends into illegally occupied territories such as the west bank, which appears to be what they're doing.

i am not against the idea of a fence per se, yet i oppose the way the fence is currently being implemented. i have not looked at powell's opinion on the fence lately.