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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (11932)	4/3/2004 10:47:12 AM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Kenneth, re:jobs. I wrote a response to that post you referenced. Message 19984648 It was a strong jobs report, but I don't think it is sustainable. I will be very surprised if I am proven wrong. Best to you.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (11932)	4/3/2004 10:49:27 AM
From: tonto	Respond to of 81568

Construction employment increased by 71,000 in March, following a decline in February. This industry has added 201,000 jobs over the past year. Most of the March employment gain occurred among specialty trade contractors. Retail trade added 47,000 jobs in March. This sector has added 132,000 jobs since December, after posting a net job loss in 2003. Within retail trade, employment in food stores increased by 13,000 over the month, reflect- ing the net impact of workers returning from a strike. Wholesale trade em- ployment edged up over the month. Since October, the industry has added 39,000 jobs. Employment in health care and social assistance rose by 36,000 in March. Over the year, this industry has gained 255,000 jobs. In March, employment increased in hospitals (12,000), offices of physicians (9,000), and nursing and residential care facilities (7,000). In the financial sector, employment in credit intermediation and related activities grew by 11,000 in March. Following declines in the last quarter of 2003, employment in credit intermediation expanded in the first quarter, reflecting a rise in mortgage refinancing activity. Prior to the fourth quarter of 2003, the industry had been adding jobs for about 3 years. Professional and business services added 42,000 jobs in March. Small em- ployment increases occurred in several of the component industries, including architectural and engineering services, computer systems design, and manage- ment consulting. Elsewhere in professional and business services, employment in temporary help services was about unchanged over the month. Since April 2003, however, the industry has added 212,000 jobs. Within the leisure and hospitality sector, employment in food services and drinking places increased by 27,000 over the month and by 186,000 over the year. Manufacturing employment was unchanged in March at 14.3 million. Declines in manufacturing employment began moderating late last summer. Employment in both durable and nondurable goods manufacturing was little changed in March. Employment in a number of other industries edged up in March, including transportation and warehousing (13,000), utilities (2,000), and government (31,000). Within government, the March job gain was concentrated in state and local education. Weekly Hours (Establishment Survey Data) The average workweek for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls decreased by 0.1 hour in March to 33.7 hours, seasonally adjusted. The manufacturing workweek also declined by 0.1 hour to 40.9 hours. Manufacturing overtime was unchanged at 4.6 hours over the month. (See table B-2.) The index of aggregate weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls fell by 0.1 percent in March to 99.0 (2002=100). The manufacturing index was down by 0.3 percent over the month to 94.1. (See table B-5.) Hourly and Weekly Earnings (Establishment Survey Data) Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 2 cents in March to $15.54, seasonally adjusted. Average weekly earnings fell by 0.2 percent over the month to $523.70. Over the year, average hourly earnings grew by 1.8 percent, and average weekly earn- ings increased by 1.5 percent. (See table B-3.) ______________________________

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (11932)	4/3/2004 11:07:33 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 81568

Ex-Nixon Aide John Dean Tells Bill Moyers that Bush Should Be Impeached _______________________ Published on Friday, April 2, 2004 by NOW with Bill Moyers Tonight on NOW with Bill Moyers , former counsel to President Nixon John Dean tells Bill Moyers that he believes the Bush Administration's secrecy and deception over the war with Iraq should result in impeachment. "Clearly, it is an impeachable offense," he says. "I think the case is overwhelming that these people presented false information to the Congress and to the American people." It is Dean's first television interview about his new book Worse than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush. In the interview, taped Friday in New York, Dean compares the Bush and Nixon White Houses. "There are many things worse than Watergate," he says. "Taking the nation to war in a time when they might not have had to gone to war, and people dying." After becoming counsel to Nixon at the age of 31, Dean emerged as a central figure in the Watergate scandal and is considered the chief whistleblower that brought down Nixon's presidency. Dean has written many articles and essays on law, government, politics, and has recounted his days in the Nixon White House and Watergate in three previous books. The NOW with Bill Moyers interview with John Dean airs tonight, Friday, April 2, at 9 P.M. on PBS (check local listings at pbs.org. Partial Transcript BILL MOYERS: You write that the administration has tried to block, frustrate or control any investigation into 9/11 using, quote, "well-proven tactics not unlike those used by the Nixon White House during Watergate." What tactics? JOHN DEAN: Stall. Stall. We knew that at the Nixon White House. Some of these are time-tested tactics. When the Congress put together a joint inquiry itself was self-defeating because it's much more difficult for a joint inquiry with its size -- the lack of attention its staff can give to a group that large. It gets diffuse. And Cheney-- BILL MOYERS: So when you testified in Congress -- in the 70's there was a Senate Investigating Committee and a House Judiciary Committee, right? JOHN DEAN: Right. Separate committees. Exactly. And they can get much more focused. So it was very effective. And Cheney and Bush were very involved. They didn't want any of the standing committees to do it. They put them together. And that was one of the first signs I saw that they're just playing it by-- I think they found an old playbook down in the basement that belonged to Richard Nixon. And they said, "Well, this stuff looks like it works." BILL MOYERS: Be specific with me. What is worse than Watergate? JOHN DEAN: If there's anything that really is the bottom line, it's taking the nation to war in a time -- when they might not have had to go to war and people dying. That is worse than Watergate. No one died for Nixon's so-called Watergate abuses. BILL MOYERS: Let me go right to page 155 of your book. You write, quote, "The evidence is overwhelming that George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have engaged in deceit and deception over going to war in Iraq. This is an impeachable offense." JOHN DEAN: Absolutely is. The founders in the debates in the states-- I cite one. I cite one that I found -- I tracked down after reading the Nixon impeachment proceedings when-- Congressman Castenmeyer had gone back to look to see what the founders said about misrepresentations and lying to the Congress. Clearly, it is an impeachable offense. And I think the case is overwhelming that these people presented false information to the Congress and to the American people. BILL MOYERS: John, I was, as you know, in the Johnson White House at the time of the Gulf of-- Tonkin when LBJ escalated the war in Vietnam on the basis of misleading information. He said there was an attack in the Gulf of Tonkin. It subsequent turns out there wasn't an attack. Many people said then and have said that LBJ deceived the country and concealed the escalation of the war. You even say in the book that he hoodwinked Congress. Are you saying that that was not an impeachable offense but what is happening now is? JOHN DEAN: No. I'm saying that was an impeachable offense. In fact, it comes up in the Nixon debates over whether the secret bombing would be an impeachable offense. That became a high crime or offense because Nixon had, in fact, told privately some members of the Congress. Johnson didn't tell anybody the game he was playing to my knowledge. And these are probably the most serious offenses that you can make-- when you take a country to war, blood and treasure, no higher decision can a President of the United States make as the Commander-in-Chief. To do it on bogus information, to use this kind of secrecy to do it is intolerable. The transcript of the complete interview with John Dean is available on the NOW with Bill Moyers Web site at www.pbs.org/now on Monday, April 5, 2004. ### commondreams.org

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (11932)	4/3/2004 11:46:18 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 81568

NEWSWEEK: Bush pulls back the curtain on who really runs the White House msnbc.msn.com WEB EXCLUSIVE By Eleanor Clift Newsweek Updated: 1:50 p.m. ET April 02, 2004 April 2 - This was the week the curtain got pulled back on the Bush presidency. In exchange for allowing Condoleezza Rice to testify under oath, President Bush gets to bring along his vice president when he appears privately before the commission. A top Republican strategist dubbed the legal document striking the unusual deal “the Wizard of Oz letter” because it strips away the myth that Bush is in charge. Until now, it’s been all speculation about Vice President Cheney’s influence. With the revelation of the tandem testimony, nobody with a straight face can deny Cheney is a co-president or worse, the puppeteer who pulls Bush’s strings. Aside from being fodder for the late-night comics, the arrangement confirms Bush’s inability to articulate anything without a script--or a tutor by his side. There’s a reason lawyers don’t take testimony in groups. The whole idea is to get individual recollections and then compare stories to uncover contradictions. Try thinking about it this way: can anyone imagine Bush’s father in a similar situation bringing his vice president? (For those who need a refresher course, the elder Bush was a rocket scientist compared to his son, and the vice president was Dan Quayle.) Even President Reagan testified alone on the Iran-contra scandal. He didn’t insist on having Vice President Bush sit beside him. Of course, Reagan couldn’t remember much of anything. His faculties were failing as a result of Alzheimer’s disease, which he later revealed. Still, Reagan permitted his testimony to be videotaped. This is a defining moment in the Bush presidency because it reveals weakness at the top. What Cheney and the tight circle around Bush are protecting is the myth they have created since 9/11 of a war president astride the world stage. Anybody who punctures that imagery is destroyed. Richard Clarke is only the latest in a series of insiders who have pulled back the curtain. At the center is an incurious president who is so inarticulate that he can’t be left on his own to make a sustained argument on behalf of his policies without falling back on rehearsed talking points and sound bites. The Democrats must be greatly tempted to lampoon Bush, but they should leave that to Jay Leno and Jon Stewart. John Kerry is smart to stay out of the way when it comes to the 9/11 commission. The Bush strategy is to muddy the picture, castigate Clarke as a disgruntled partisan, and portray his criticisms as nothing but politics. But Clarke’s book is flying off the shelves, and his revelations will be followed later this month by a sequel to “Bush at War” from Bob Woodward of Watergate fame, which the White House is nervously anticipating. Also due by the end of April is a memoir/expose by Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who angered the administration last year when he went public with his finding that Iraq had not sought uranium from Africa. Wilson’s wife was then exposed as a CIA operative by columnist Robert Novak, who was acting on information provided by the administration. Wilson’s book is titled, “The Politics of Truth.” It could be subtitled: “What I Didn’t Find in Africa.” Wilson praises Clarke for how he’s handling himself in the media spotlight. “He’s a ferocious bureaucrat,” says Wilson, “and I mean that in the positive sense of the term. He learned to operate in that environment.” When 9/11 commissioner Jim Thompson confronted Clarke on the gap between what he is saying now and the rosy briefings he gave while working the White House, Clarke explained that was politics. Wilson says an effective response would have been to point out to the many lawyers on the 9/11 commission that White House aides are paid to make the case for the president just as lawyers make the case for their client. “If you can’t abide it, then you step away,” says Wilson. “Clarke was in it for the long haul, to roll back Al Qaeda.” Clarke said under oath that he would not accept a job with the Kerry campaign, and he asked an activist group (MoveOn.org) to stop using his voice on an ad bashing Bush. What Clarke said has been said before, that the Bush administration was slow to recognize the terrorist threat before 9/11 and that going to war in Iraq was unnecessary and has made us less safe. The difference is who’s saying it. Clark is not some Washington time-server. He’s the ultimate serious guy who knows what he’s doing and cares passionately about countering terrorism. He was Bush’s crisis manager on 9/11, the man who sat in the chair in the Situation Room while other top aides fled to safety. The person whose reputation got hurt the most during the Clarke counterattack was Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who went to the Senate floor to threaten Clarke with perjury. It was crude character assassination, and it opened the door for Democrats to make the same accusation against Condoleezza Rice, who has made more conflicting statements than Clarke. The danger is not that Rice might actually be prosecuted, but the charge is political mud, and it might stick.