Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: LindyBill who wrote (36496)	3/26/2004 1:32:20 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793640

The Note - NEWS SUMMARY It's Friday, so -- of course -- regular readers know it is time for The Note's weekly Ups and Downs, What's Hot and What's Not, Winners and Losers, Plays and Outrages of the Week Awards!!!! In presidential politics, as always, the answer to the question "Who won the week?" can be looked at two ways: Who won, in terms of raw Gang-of-500-driven, media-filtered analysis of whose election chances have been helped or hurt? Or: who won, in terms of the relative merits of each sides substantive claims to honesty, leadership, and plans for America's future? (And, we hate to have to hasten to add, The Note is indifferent on both scores to who wins, despite what readers on all sides think. . . . ) While the Googling monkeys spend the weekend doing regression analysis on all sorts of serious Bush-Kerry policy proposals, let's go with the superficial and ephemeral raw political tally!!! While Bush-Cheney started the week smelling blood by continuing to pound its Kerry-loves-taxes message on the large head of the vacationing, Grey Poupon-eating skier/nominee, the back of The Note envelope says that the President lost the week. Between Clarke's book, Dr. Rice's refusal to testify and questions about her own consistency, the President's RTCAWMD joke flap, gas prices, and entitlement trust fund problems -- things were less than smooth for the ol' re-elect. Kerry's win was also fueled by Democratic unity galore and the late addition of pretty boffo Friday print coverage of the unveiling of his corporate tax plan (with the twin messages of stopping outsourcing and cutting corporate taxes overshadowing the caveats). BUT for those who are tempted to score the week as a Kerry rout, Note well four things: A. The relentless Kerry-image-shaping of the Bush ad campaign, whose work in defining Kerry isn't fully appreciated by national political reporters who fail to reside in battleground states. B. Last night's reminder that John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. C. This morning's Washington Post reminder that John Kerry is no Bill Clinton. D. Yesterday's Unborn Victims of Violence vote, which offers a window into tough future Senate votes for John Kerry. So, mark this one down and re-set the scoreboard!!!! Just a few more intense weeks to go until election day!!!

To: LindyBill who wrote (36496)	3/26/2004 2:11:59 PM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793640

GOP Moves to Declassify Clarke Testimony By DAVID ESPO .c The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - In a highly unusual move, key Republicans in Congress are seeking to declassify testimony that former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke gave in 2002 about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday. Frist said the intent was to determine whether Clarke lied under oath - either in 2002 or this week - when he appeared before a bipartisan Sept. 11 commission and sharply criticized President Bush's handling of the war on terror. ``Until you have him under oath both times you don't know,'' Frist said. One Republican aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the request had come from House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairman of the House intelligence committee. The request was the latest evidence of a counterattack against Clarke, who has criticized Bush both in a new book and in his appearance before the bipartisan commission on Wednesday. In his testimony, Clarke said that while the Clinton administration had ``no higher priority'' than combatting terrorists, Bush made it ``an important issue but not an urgent issue'' in the eight months between the time he took office and the Sept. 11 attacks. Clarke also testified that the invasion of Iraq had undermined the war on terror. The request for declassification applies to Clarke's appearance in July 2002 before a meeting of the intelligence committees of both the House and Senate. No immediate information was available on how the declassification process works, but one GOP aide said the CIA and perhaps the White House would play a role in determining whether to make the testimony public. Frist disclosed the effort to declassify Clarke's testimony in remarks on the Senate floor, then talked with reporter. He said he personally didn't know whether there were any discrepancies between Clarke's two appearances. Without mentioning the congressional Republicans' effort, White House spokesman Scott McClellan continued the administration's criticism of Clarke on Friday. ``With every new assertion he makes, every revision of his past comments, he only further undermines his credibility,'' McClellan told reporters. Asked about Bush's personal reaction to the criticism from a former White House aide, McClellan said, ``Any time someone takes a serious issue like this and revises history it's disappointing.''