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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (13572)10/23/2003 9:20:49 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793587
 
The Prez was talking to reporters on the plane yesterday. The Press Secretary hates it when he does that. "I just can't respect anybody that would really let his people starve and shrink in size as a result of malnutrition," Bush said.
______________________________________________

washingtonpost.com
Bush: Pressure Is Building on N. Korea
After Indonesia Stopover, President Engages Reporters En Route to Australia

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 23, 2003; Page A22

CANBERRA, Australia, Oct. 23 -- President Bush said Wednesday that regional pressure was building on North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program and expressed hope that Iran would fulfill a pledge to stop enriching uranium and allow inspectors unrestricted access to its nuclear facilities.

His comments came in an unusual conversation with reporters aboard Air Force One. Bush said his decision to enlist China, Japan, Russia and South Korea for talks with North Korea had created "a different dynamic" and that "the neighborhood is now speaking." He called those countries "our partners in this effort" to restrain North Korea's reclusive leader, Kim Jong Il.

The subject of North Korea has hung over Bush's six-nation Asian tour. His offer of some undefined security guarantees to North Korea in exchange for its abandonment of its nuclear ambitions was abruptly dismissed by Kim.

"Kim Jong Il is used to being able to deal bilaterally with the United States, but the change of policy now is, is that he must deal with other nations, most notably China," Bush said. "Now he's got his big neighbor to the right on his border, he's got a neighbor to the south, he's got Japan, he's got another neighbor, Russia, all saying the same thing."

Bush also repeated his sharp criticism of the North Korean leader. "I just can't respect anybody that would really let his people starve and shrink in size as a result of malnutrition," Bush said.

Bush said that he believed the four other partners in the nuclear talks would back an agreement with Kim like the one the administration is drafting. "He's been saying, 'I want a security guarantee,' " Bush said. "What we have now said is that in return for dismantling the programs, we're all willing to sign some kind of document -- not a treaty, but a piece of paper -- that says we won't attack you."

The president said he was also optimistic about Iran's agreement this week with three European foreign ministers to suspend uranium enrichment and open the doors to unrestricted inspections. "The Iranians, it looks like they're accepting the demands of the free world, and now it's up to them to prove that they've accepted the demands. It's a very positive development," he said.

Bush said the administration was hopeful it could reach a deal with Iran on the handful of key al Qaeda leaders who the administration believes are there. Bush said abandoning nuclear weapons and giving up the al Qaeda leaders "will help relations with Iran." His national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, said last month that it was unclear whether these leaders were being detained, but she said the administration would continue to insist that Iran must "transfer these people out."

Bush spoke to reporters as he flew to Australia, the last stop of his seven-day trip. On Thursday morning, he addressed a raucous session of the Australian Parliament. On Wednesday, he visited Indonesia, making a three-hour, heavily guarded stop on the resort island of Bali. There, he met President Megawati Sukarnoputri and sought to reassure moderate Muslim leaders that the war against terrorism was not a war against their religion.

"We know that Islam is fully compatible with liberty and tolerance and progress, because we see the proof in your country and in our own," he said with Megawati at his side after a walk on the beachfront. "Terrorists who claim Islam as their inspiration defile one of the world's great faiths. Murder has no place in any religious tradition, must find no home in Indonesia."

However, Muslim leaders in a round-table discussion Bush held with Indonesian clerics told him that the United States would be a better model of democracy if it used peaceful means to resolve conflicts.

Azyumardi Azra, president of the Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University in Jakarta, said the meeting was supposed to last 30 minutes but went for 55. Bush did a lot of listening and took a pad out of his pocket and took his own notes, Azra said. "We criticized him on many fronts, on his foreign policies," Azra said. "At least he was willing to listen, and we hope he would reflect on this and, hopefully, it would bring some changes in his policies."

Bush also announced that the administration would give $157 million over six years to Indonesia to improve general education in both religious and secular state schools.

Bush told reporters later that he had been asked about the recent controversy around remarks made by Army Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin. An evangelical Christian who heads a Pentagon office focused on hunting Osama bin Laden and former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, Boykin described the United States as "a Christian nation" and credited "our God" with the capture of a Somali warlord. In remarks that offended Muslims, he said the war on terrorism was being fought against a "spiritual enemy" represented by Satan.

"Boykin came up," Bush said. "I said he didn't reflect my opinion. Look, it just doesn't reflect what the government thinks. And I think they were pleased to hear that."

In his 34-minute session with reporters, Bush appeared relaxed and confident, wearing a blue flight jacket with his name stitched on a breast pocket, chomping noisily on butterscotch candy and pretending to play a shell game with the array of tape recorders before him. He repeatedly refused the pleas of his senior aides to cut off the interview, then lingered to speak off the record to the reporters.

In the interview, Bush suggested that he was adopting a more cautious approach on some issues.

"I've been saying all along that not every policy issue needs to be dealt with by force," he said. "You've got to have some patience in foreign policy." Even before the run-up to the Iraq war, Bush's ties with Europe had been frayed by his tendency to act in what he considered the United States' interests, without always consulting affected countries. Bush told the reporters around a large wooden conference table that "by working hard to establish good relations on a lot of fronts, when a common problem arises, we can affect the solution in a positive way."

In his meeting with the religious leaders, Bush said, the issue of the Middle East conflict came up. "They said the United States is tilted toward Israel, and I said our policy is tilted toward peace . . . and then I went through the notion of a Palestinian state, and the need for us to fight off terror in order for a state to develop," he said.

Bush was reminded by a reporter of his earlier optimism about the Middle East in a summit attended by Mahmoud Abbas, who subsequently resigned as the Palestinian prime minister. Bush said he was "disappointed" that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat "shoved" Abbas "out of the way," which he called "an unfortunate decision, because it stopped good progress toward a Palestinian state."

Referring to the stalled U.S.-backed peace initiative, Bush said, "The road map is still there."

Bush said he was "the first president to have articulated" the policy favoring creation of a Palestinian state. However, in January 2001, President Bill Clinton had also called for a "viable Palestinian state."

In his speech to the Australian Parliament on Thursday morning, Bush delivered a new warning about the possible spread of nuclear weapons to terrorists. Bush, who has been accused of overstating Iraq's arsenal of unconventional weapons in making his case for war, spoke of extremists who "hide and strike within free societies."

"The terrorists hope to gain chemical, biological or nuclear weapons -- the means to match their hatred. So we're confronting outlaw regimes that aid terrorists, that pursue weapons of mass destruction, and that defy the demands of the world," Bush said.

After Britain, Australia was the biggest source of military personnel for the U.S.-led forces that attacked Afghanistan and Iraq. Prime Minister John Howard endured harsh criticism for backing Bush. The U.S. president hailed Howard as "a man of steel," which Bush said was "Texan for 'fair dinkum,' " an Australian expression for a genuine person.

Police estimated that 5,000 demonstrators, including students and trade unionists, massed outside the Parliament House during Bush's speech. Two Green Party senators interrupted Bush's address with shouts, and were ordered to leave the chamber but refused. Bush drew applause when he ad-libbed, "I love free speech."

Reaching out to his many critics in the Parliament, Bush said the United States is "committed to multilateral institutions, because global threats require a global response."

"We're committed to collective security," he added. Bush then went on to outline a defense of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. "Collective security requires more than solemn discussions and sternly worded pronouncements," he said. "It requires collective will."

Bush implored the lawmakers not to slacken their commitment to the U.S.-led war on terrorism. "Every milestone of liberty was considered impossible before it was achieved," he said.

Bush was scheduled to leave Australia later Thursday for a one-day visit to Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. He is scheduled to return to the White House on Friday morning.

washingtonpost.com



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (13572)10/23/2003 9:56:07 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793587
 
Brown will not be confirmed this time around. Watch for her reappearance if the Republicans pick up more Senate seats in 04.
____________________________________________

Bush judicial nominee slammed

Senate Democrats portray her as a conservative activist.
By David Whitney -- Bee Washington Bureau - (Published October 23, 2003)

WASHINGTON -- California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, President Bush's controversial nominee for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, ran into a firestorm of criticism from Democrats during a four-hour Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing Wednesday.

The 54-year-old daughter of an Alabama sharecropper was grilled extensively about positions she had taken in speeches and in court opinions that Democrats said showed her to be a conservative activist outside the mainstream of public and judicial thinking.

Among her critics was California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who openly questioned whether the African American jurist from the Sacramento area could be trusted to set aside her personal opinions and follow legal precedents if confirmed to the appeals court seat.

The D.C. appellate court is widely viewed as second in importance only to the U.S. Supreme Court because of its exclusive role in many cases involving the federal government.

Brown has been an outspoken opponent of affirmative action and a strong critic of the growth of government. In her tenure on the California Supreme Court, she wrote the principal opinion enforcing Proposition 209, the referendum prohibiting affirmative action programs. Although her colleagues agreed with her, some refused to join her opinion in the 2000 case, saying she had gone too far and had used needlessly scathing language in an effort to extend the proposition's reach.

Republicans, led by committee Chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah, were generally enthusiastic about Brown, whom many consider to be Bush's leading contender for the U.S. Supreme Court when an opening occurs.

"How anyone would not think you are a superior nominee is beyond me," Hatch told Brown at the close of the hearing. "I'm going to do all that I can do to see that you are confirmed."

With more than a couple dozen organizations, ranging from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to the People for the American Way, lining up to oppose her nomination, however, Brown's confirmation has become the newest judicial battleground.

In September, Miguel Estrada asked Bush to withdraw his nomination to the same appeals court because of solid Democratic opposition that made it impossible for Republican leaders to move his confirmation to a Senate vote.

Brown showed the stamina Wednesday to endure such a confirmation battle. While she hesitated and perhaps even stumbled in a few of the exchanges with her sharpest critics, she remained even-tempered and unapologetic throughout, and ended the hearing with an expression of gratitude for how courteously she had been treated.

Hatch said that while Brown has taken positions that have angered liberals, she can't be the conservative firebrand that they paint her to be when she got 76 percent of the vote in the 1998 election, higher than three other California Supreme Court justices on the ballot that year.

"She is hardly out of the mainstream," he said.

But Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., dubbed Brown a "frequent dissenter in the rightward direction," and he ticked off cases in which she had stood alone in opposing the right to sue for age discrimination, restrictions on selling cigarettes to minors, bans on the sales of guns on fairgrounds and housing assistance for displaced poor, elderly and disabled renters in San Francisco.

"Given your hostility to the federal government and its role in our lives, your nomination to the D.C. Circuit is ironic," Durbin said. "I am skeptical about this nomination."

In her questioning, Feinstein zeroed in on a speech Brown delivered three years ago to the Federalist Society at the University of Chicago Law School that the senator said was disturbing because of its anti-government tone.

In that speech, Brown said that "where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates, and our ability to control our destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege, war in the streets, unapologetic expropriation of property, the precipitous decline of the rule of law, the rapid rise of corruption, the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit."

"Do you really believe that?" Feinstein asked.

"I was referring there to the unintended consequences of government," Brown said.

But Feinstein, who met privately with Brown on Tuesday, called her words "extraordinary for an appellate court justice."

"How can I depend on you to disassociate yourself from those views and follow the law?" Feinstein said.

Brown said she would keep her personal opinions out of her future work. "I absolutely understand the difference in roles in being a speaker and being a judge," she told the committee.

When questioned about the speeches, Brown attempted to back away from them without renouncing their pronouncements. Instead, she said they were intended in part to be provocative for her audiences, which in the case of the Federalist Society was only about 45 people.

She said she was "simply stirring the pot a little bit, getting people to think, to challenge them."

And when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., attacked her for her anti-government tone in the speeches, Brown uttered her strongest defense.

"I don't hate the government," she said. "I am part of the government. I've been a government servant 99 percent of my career. I know there are things that can't get done unless government does them."

The committee did not say when it would vote on Brown's nomination, but she is likely to advance past the GOP-controlled committee to the Senate floor. Democrats already are filibustering three of Bush's conservative nominations there. Democrats on the committee pointed out that 165 of Bush's judicial nominees have been confirmed.

sacbee.com



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (13572)10/24/2003 7:44:22 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793587
 
Day four of Jill Leovy's crime reporter diary. SLATE
___________________________________________________

Subject: Entry 4
Posted Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 11:14 AM PT

Today, I need to try to interview homicide victims' families for a gang-retaliation story. I have two calls to make. But even if I get in touch with both contacts, I will probably not do two such interviews in one day, or even back-to-back over two days. I used to do that. Not any more.

Before I became a reporter on this beat, I had covered homicide from time to time, as nearly every reporter does. I usually spoke to grieving families in the first hours or days after their loved one was murdered—never an easy assignment. But in the past year I've learned that interviewing surviving loved ones right after a murder is easier than interviewing them months or years later. The first weeks are steeped in disbelief. There are certain phrases you hear over and over: "It doesn't seem real." "I wish I could sleep all the time." People are often surprisingly pulled together early on. Or, they alternate, coming apart only briefly, then regaining their composure. I've found that in this period, I can actually schedule an interview for an allotted amount of time and leave when I planned to. Later, forget it.

It takes the ensuing months for the abyss to open. Then, people still say, "It doesn't seem real." But in those interviews, they rock back and forth in agony, talk and cry for hours, stare at a fixed spot in space, and compulsively rehash the same excruciating details: "The bleeding wouldn't stop." "His glasses were shattered." "He was so cold." And worst and most common of these: "He died alone."

Some people simply don't make it. I sometimes stay in touch with victims' family members, and there are a few I know who are slipping: They are drinking all the time, talking about suicide. I think the most painful interview I ever did was with a mother who had lost her 16-year-old son a full six years before. She couldn't get any words out, sat choked and rigid, staring at the floor, fidgeting, unable even to cry. One call I made to the relative of a recent Southeast murder victim this week went awry yesterday: The family tells me this relative died, suddenly, of an asthma attack, about two weeks after the homicide. This happens, too: I have dealt with at least three cases in which mothers died unexpectedly of health problems within a few months of their children's murders.

The pain of sudden death often comes with an incalculable burden of anger and helplessness. This is especially true when—as with many gang shootings in South Los Angeles—the murder is never solved. And victims' families often endure astounding indignities. I know of a mother who learned of her son's murder from a pair of tennis shoes. She had been given a claim check at the hospital and told to take it to the property room, where she was wordlessly handed his shoes.

I brace myself most for these interviews with people two to five years after the homicide. I get a headache in the interview, a headache when I go over my notes, and a headache when I try to write about it. I am secretly afraid of my notes on these stories. I hate my notes. I sometimes avoid them for days before I have the courage to go back into them.

The woman I arrange to interview today lost her 16-year-old about three months ago. Her son's killer's had said, "What's up nigga?" and then started shooting. The boy ran. He was hit in the back but kept running. The shooter hit him again and again. He stumbled, then fell, and then the gunman walked up to where he lay on the pavement and tried to empty the clip in his head. The gun jammed; the boy later died at a hospital.

"How are you holding up?" I ask over the phone. She says what they all say: "Day by day."

Jill Leovy is a crime reporter for the Los Angeles Times.

Article URL: slate.msn.com