|
Iowa 2004 presidential primary precinct caucus and caucuses news">
Iowa 2004 presidential primary precinct caucus and caucuses news, reports
and information on 2004 Democrat and Republican candidates, campaigns
and issues Iowa
Presidential Watch's
IOWA DAILY REPORT Holding
the Democrats accountable today, tomorrow...forever.
THE DAILY REPORT
for Wednesday, October 1, 2003
... QUOTABLE:
morning quotes:
“If [Robert]Novak's source is telling the
truth, then there's no crime, and the "scandal" is
utterly phony.” – Wall Street Journal’s James
Taranto, on the supposed White House leak
“Will they love Wes Clark when they see their
military man hustling for votes just like another
politician?” – writer Peter S. Canellos, in
the Boston Globe online.
"You could have a
situation when one person wins in Iowa, another
wins in New Hampshire and yet another wins in
South Carolina. Who is the nominee? The momentum
situation isn't there,"
– comment from an adviser to a major Democratic
candidate.
“Howard Dean topped John Kerry by 9 points in a
new poll of likely New Hampshire Democratic
primary voters, with newcomer Wesley Clark
speeding past the other seven Democratic
presidential contenders” – AP report in The
Union Leader.
"Let me tell you something. We're going to give
them the truth and they're going to think it's
hell." – Wesley Clark, responding to audience
shout to ‘give them hell, Wes!’
“I have been watching this subplot to the Dean
phenomenon for two months, ever since Dennis
Kucinich nicked him for having supported an
increase in Social Security's eligibility age -- a
criticism that Dean also initially denied and then
flipped on. It has happened on Social Security, on
trade, on middle-class taxes, on budget-balancing
policies. Medicare is an especially big
enchilada.” – Nedra Pickler, in her Washington
Post article.
“Bottom line: Gephardt and Kerry have a
legitimate point, and Dean will have trouble
expanding his remarkable base to the elderly and
to voters of moderate means unless he does a more
forthright job of facing up to his past.” –
Nedra Pickler.
"If there's a leak in my administration, I want
to know who it is," – President George W.
Bush.
“Senator Bob Graham has long enjoyed a
reputation as one of the most courtly,
mild-mannered and even long-winded members of the
Senate. But on the presidential campaign trail, he
has bemused the Washington establishment by
transforming himself into a one-man grenade
launcher. His target is President Bush.” –
Diane Cardwell, for the New York Times.
"He [Graham] has clearly decided to throw some
bombs, and Bob Graham as a bomb-thrower is sort of
an oxymoron for those of us who have watched him
for a quarter-century." -- Stephen Craig, a
political science professor at the University of
Florida.
… Among the offerings in today’s update:
morning offering:
Howard Dean tops John Kerry and Wesley Clark in
New Hampshire poll
Bush promises to Tackle Economy and Iraq
Wesley Clark’s Texas visit
John Edwards takes lead in South Carolina,
according to new poll
Unlike past generals, Clark will have to fight
Thomas Oliphant say the past is haunting Dean
on the Medicare issue
Gary Hart Endorses Kerry’s White House Bid
Black Entertainment Television will produce &
air ads encouraging young people to register &
vote
Kennedy vs Kennedy???
Dem wannabes’ flip-flops irk campaign
strategists
Did Bill Clinton Flop in California?
New York Times: Al Sharpton’s campaign in
disarray – at least 1 top aide quits
Bush expected in New Hampshire on October 9th
Tom DeLay favors ‘guest worker program’ but not
amnesty
Bob Graham tries an ‘attack dog’ mode
OpinionJournal’s James Taranto – “Warp-Speed
Wesley”
North Korea Insists It Won’t Go Back to Nuke
Talks Without U.S. Concessions
* CANDIDATES/CAUCUSES:
Morning …
Union Leader online article from the
Associated Press, “Dean tops Kerry, Clark in
NH poll”. Excerpts: “Howard Dean topped John
Kerry by 9 points in a new poll of likely New
Hampshire Democratic primary voters, with newcomer
Wesley Clark speeding past the other seven
Democratic presidential contenders. Dean was
the choice for 26 percent of voters, followed by
Kerry with 17 percent and Clark with 10
percent, according to the poll by WHDH-TV and
Suffolk University conducted between Sept.
26-28. The poll was released Monday. Sen. Joe
Lieberman of Connecticut had 7 percent and Sen.
John Edwards of North Carolina and Rep. Dick
Gephardt of Missouri were at 6 percent. The
remaining candidates were at 2 percent or fewer. A
Suffolk poll conducted in March showed Kerry leading
with 32 percent of the vote, Lieberman second with
17 percent and Dean third with 10 percent. The new
poll numbers are similar to a poll conducted Sept.
24-25 and released Friday by Zogby International
that showed Dean leading Kerry by a 10-point margin
and Clark in third with 10 percent of likely
Democratic primary voters. The latest poll shows
Dean has crossed an important bridge in his bid to
win New Hampshire, according to Suffolk
University adjunct professor and pollster David
Paleologos. "This is a wake-up call for John
Kerry," Paleologos said. "Kerry needs to reconnect
with the voters that once supported him." The
poll also found Dean's popularity strong, with a
favorable rating of 61 percent, while only 14
percent rated him unfavorably. Clark's strong
numbers despite his recent entrance into the race
shows the retired general has room to boost his
support as he continues to introduce himself to New
Hampshire voters, Paleologos said. In other results,
the poll of likely Democratic voters found 56
percent said it was not worth going to war in Iraq
and 64 percent opposed President Bush's request for
$87 billion to help rebuild Iraq. The poll of
400 New Hampshire Democrats who said they were
likely to cast a ballot on primary day, tentatively
scheduled for Jan. 27, 2004, had a margin of error
of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. …
Boston Globe online article by the
Washington Associated Press, “Democrat Edwards
takes lead in South Carolina”. Excerpts:
“John Edwards has grabbed the lead in South
Carolina, according to a poll released Tuesday that
shows the North Carolina senator as the only
presidential candidate in the state's Democratic
primary race in double digits. More than four in
10 of those questioned, 42 percent, remain
undecided in the survey of South Carolina voters
conducted by the American Research Group of
Manchester, N.H. Edwards was at 16 percent
in the poll. Sen. Joe Lieberman of
Connecticut and Edwards were essentially
tied in an August poll by the same firm, with
Lieberman at 14 percent and Edwards at 10
percent. Edwards is counting on a strong
performance in South Carolina, which is not only a
neighboring state but also his native state.
Edwards was born in Seneca, S.C.; his family moved
to North Carolina when he was a child. Other recent
state polls have shown several candidates together
at the top and a large number of undecided voters.
Lieberman, who led in South Carolina earlier this
year, was at 7 percent with Wesley Clark, who
recently entered the race. Howard Dean, the former
Vermont governor, was at 6 percent, and Sen. John
Kerry of Massachusetts, Rep. Dick Gephardt of
Missouri and Al Sharpton were at 5 percent. Carol
Moseley Braun was at 4 percent, Sen. Bob Graham of
Florida was at 2 percent and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of
Ohio was at 1 percent. The poll of 600 voters who
say they're likely to vote in the Democratic primary
was conducted Sept. 25-29 and had a margin of error
of plus or minus 4 percentage points. South Carolina
holds its Democratic primary on Feb. 3. …
Houston Chronicle
article by Katharine Q. Seelye of the New York
Times, “Clark out to prove he’s best candidate”.
Excerpts: “WASHINGTON -- Gen. Wesley Clark, the
newly minted Democratic presidential contender,
swept through the capital on Tuesday, introducing
himself to House members and trying to persuade them
that his candidacy was viable. He was guided by Rep.
Charles Rangel of New York, one of the most powerful
Democrats in Congress and an influential black
leader. Rangel contrasted the other nine
Democratic candidates with Clark, saying the retired
four-star Army general could challenge the Bush
administration on the war in Iraq without having his
credentials or his patriotism questioned. Rangel
said that would allow the Democrats to move on to
domestic issues like education, health care and the
deficit. About 65 members went to meet the
general at the house of John Winburn, a Democratic
lobbyist who is a friend of Rangel. Among them was
John Dingell of Michigan, the senior Democrat in the
House. Clark spoke and fielded questions for 90
minutes on topics like Mideast policy, why
he is a Democrat and how to save
manufacturing employment. The meeting was
closed. Afterward, lawmakers who went to the
session said they were not ready to endorse the
general until they had heard more about his views
and could see whether his campaign was taking off.
But they seemed intrigued. Rep. Dick Gephardt
of Missouri, the Democratic leader in the House for
eight years, has racked up the most endorsements --
31 -- from his House colleagues. That number is
expected to climb to 32 this week with the addition
of Rep. Ted Strickland of Ohio. Clark has 10 House
endorsements. …
Washington Times online article by Donald
Lambro, “Flip-flops irk campaign strategists”.
Excerpts: “Top
strategists for Democratic presidential hopefuls are
complaining privately that too many of the
candidates are flip-flopping on issues to appeal to
their party's activists and special interests,
making it difficult to produce a clear national
front-runner.
They say this failure to project clarity and
consistency in their campaigns means many party
voters remain undecided about the 10 candidates.
"You could have a situation when one person wins in
Iowa, another wins in New Hampshire and yet another
wins in South Carolina. Who is the nominee? The
momentum situation isn't there," said an adviser
to a major candidate. Sixteen weeks before the Iowa
caucuses, the Democratic candidates appear more
divided than ever on Iraq, free trade, raising taxes
on the middle class, and how much should be spent on
health care for the uninsured. "You have a number
of candidates trying to realign themselves on a
number of positions that aren't playing well with
the base of our party, just to pander," said another
senior campaign strategist to one of the top-tier
candidates. Former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont, long
a free-trade advocate, has now turned into his
party's strongest critic of unfettered trade,
pledging to cancel trade agreements with any country
whose labor laws do not meet U.S. standards.
Trade protection is the pivotal issue for organized
labor, whose unions have been major supporters of
Rep. Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri. But Mr.
Dean's new position has helped him move ahead of Mr.
Gephardt in Iowa, a big labor state. Last
week, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina called for
repealing President Bush's tariff increases on
imported steel, even though he voted for those
boosts in the Senate. Sen. John Kerry of
Massachusetts, who voted for the congressional
resolution that authorized the use of force in Iraq,
has since become one of Mr. Bush's severest
opponents on the conflict. Perhaps no candidate
has flip-flopped more on Iraq than retired four-star
Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas, the newest entry
to the race. When he announced his candidacy on
Sept. 17, he said he would have voted for the war
resolution had he been in the Senate. Two days
later, he switched positions, saying he would have
voted against the resolution. The lack of a clear
front-runner is similar to the run-up to the 1992
election when Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton joined the
race. For the 2000 election, Vice President Al
Gore was the clear front-runner for the Democratic
nomination. This year, the field continues to simmer.
After months of confining themselves to attacking
Mr. Bush, the candidates in the last few weeks have
begun to attack each other. In a debate last week,
Mr. Gephardt, Mr. Kerry and Sen. Joe Lieberman of
Connecticut all took shots at Mr. Dean for his new
position on trade and for his past advocacy of cuts
in Medicare. Mr. Dean during the weekend criticized
Mr. Clark for having supported Republicans in the
past and only recently having entered Democratic
Party politics. Some strategists suggest that the
Democratic primary battle may be longer than
anticipated. "I don't think this is going to be
settled early," said the adviser to a major
candidate. "More than likely you will have a big
candidate field barreling through Iowa, barreling
through New Hampshire and only beginning to winnow
out in the February 3 contests in South Carolina,
Arizona, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Delaware. You will
still have maybe five major candidates with money to
spend."
…
New York Times online article by Michael
Slackman, “Sharpton Campaign in Disarray; at Least 1
Top Aide Quits”. Excerpts: “The
Rev. Al Sharpton's long-shot bid for the Democratic
presidential nomination stumbled today, with a top
campaign aide quitting and a second threatening to
resign. Mr. Sharpton's national campaign manager,
Frank Watkins, announced that he was leaving, and
his coordinator in the key state of South Carolina,
Kevin Gray, told Mr. Sharpton he wants out, aides to
the campaign said. Both men were longtime
supporters of the Rev. Jesse Jackson, having
worked on both of his bids for the White House.
Even before the upheaval in the campaign, Mr.
Sharpton's strongest supporters lamented that he had
failed to build a campaign structure that extended
beyond the one-man style that he relied on stir up
the New York political scene. The aides
departures also suggest a deepening rift between
Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson's camp, a gap that
could complicate Mr. Sharpton's efforts to win the
support of activists from the civil rights movement.
For Mr. Sharpton, who is trying to replicate Mr.
Jackson's electoral successes in the 1984 and 1988
Democratic presidential primaries, the staff
defections and grumbling among some who should be
core supporters may undermine what was already a
long-shot bid, not just for the nomination, but for
a role in shaping the direction of the Democratic
party. Mr. Watkins said in a statement issued
this evening that he was leaving the campaign for
personal reasons but that he continued to fully
support Mr. Sharpton's effort. He said that he would
remain an unpaid adviser to the campaign and that he
planned to vote for Mr. Sharpton. Mr. Gray could not
be reached for comment. Aides to Mr. Sharpton
said they planned to issue a statement tonight that
would announce staff changes, including the creation
of a new fund-raising arm and, presumably, a new
national campaign director. …While his personal
appearances are generally well received, whether in
a Southern church, or on national television, he has
left at least some people wondering if he is running
to advance a specific cause, or to advance his own
personal agenda. "I don't think it's a mess," said
Michael A. Harding, a lawyer and longtime adviser to
Mr. Sharpton. "I think it's the nature of just
working with Sharpton. You really have to have a
very strong fortitude and a lot of patience and a
vision because getting there is going to be messy
but you are going to get there." …
Boston Globe online article by Peter S.
Canellos, “Unlike past generals, Clark will
have to fight”. Excerpts: “Almost from the
moment retired General Wesley K. Clark announced for
the presidency, news organizations began showing
pictures of past generals who became president,
arrayed like a new set of collectibles from the
Franklin Mint: Washington, Jackson, Harrison, Grant,
Eisenhower, and more. But parallels between Clark's
run and those of past generals are nothing but
trivia. With a few exceptions, generals were
courted by party bosses to front their tickets the
way producers try to sign up movie stars to rescue
failing Broadway musicals. The generals were handed
their nominations with little or no effort on their
parts. Clark is the first general to suit up for
a presidential run since the nominating process
became democratic in 1972. That means he's going to
have to do something few previous
general-politicians have had to do: fight.
Despite a medium-long list of congressional
endorsements and encouragement from the stepdaddy of
most Democratic contenders, Bill Clinton, Clark is
running an insurgency campaign. That means he's
going to have to take on not only George W. Bush,
but the whole political establishment, running as a
maverick against all the professional politicians.
Clark seems game for this kind of campaign, and his
supporters are drawn to the idea of a military man
exposing the fallacies of armchair warriors all
along the political spectrum. But every time he
goes on the attack, like all insurgents from John
McCain to Howard Dean, he'll be surrendering the
prime advantage of past generals who ran for office:
the sense that they floated high above the fray,
embodying the national interest in the same way they
embodied national defense. … Clark isn't the
subject of a draft, and no other candidates are
dropping by the wayside. He didn't win the Civil War
or World War II or even the Gulf War. He won
Kosovo, an interesting war and possibly a blueprint
for today's overseas police actions, but one that
engendered no special affection on the homefront.
Now, there may be even less affection for Clark
in the military, where his relationships with fellow
commanders seemed to range from cordial to chilly
and where he ran afoul of Clinton's second-term
defense secretary, William S. Cohen. This is not
to say that Clark is a cipher, only that he
shares almost nothing in common with past generals
who went to the White House. His bureaucratic
battles in the Pentagon, and his arm-twisting of
allies involved in the Kosovo campaign, may better
prepare him for presidential politics than leading a
charge at Vicksburg. And his willingness to mingle
with voters in the living rooms of Iowa and New
Hampshire reveals he has no illusions about his
status. This is not a surprise to the hardy band of
supporters who backed Clark during his long period
of deciding to run. But so much of what gives Clark
his aura of formidability is the presumption that so
many others are yearning for a military hero, a man
above politics, to lead them. Will they love Wes
Clark when they see their military man hustling for
votes just like another politician? …
Union Leader online article by AP writer
Kelley Shannon, “Democratic candidate Clark
visits Texas”. Excerpts: “Retired Army Gen.
Wesley Clark swooped into the heart of President
Bush's territory Monday and declared the nation
needs a change in leadership. "I'm happy to be down
here in George W. Bush's home state. I think people
in Texas know very well what this administration is
Washington is about today," said Clark, who
entered the Democratic presidential race 12 days
ago. Clark repeated his call for an independent
investigation into reports that a Bush
administration official leaked the identity of a
covert CIA agent. Clark said the name was released
"in violation of law, in violation of good sense, in
violation of protection of the American intelligence
system." "It's wrong, it's shady, it's cheap. And
we're calling for an independent commission to be
established," Clark said, to cheers from the crowd.
… Clark also said Bush's tax cuts have hurt the
economy and that Bush has taken the United States
into "an unnecessary war in Iraq in which we've
lost hundreds of people. We don't need to be there."
After folk singers warmed up the crowd in this
Democratic bastion of Texas, Clark stepped onto a
stage in front of a large Texas flag at a downtown
park, where some 400 people greeted him with chants
of "We want Clark!" Some held signs that said,
"Texans for Clark" and "Don't Mess with Wes." During
a pause Clark's speech, someone in the audience
yelled, "Give 'em hell, Wes." Clark responded: "Let
me tell you something. We're going to give them the
truth and they're going to think it's hell." He
went on to say that he was paraphrasing President
Harry Truman and he praised Truman's presidency. "He
understood where the buck stopped," Clark said.
Before the rally, Clark attended a fund-raiser at a
private home and met with 18 Democratic state
legislators who have endorsed him. One of the
lawmakers, Democratic Rep. Richard Raymond of
Laredo, introduced Clark and said of Bush, "General,
if you send him back to us, we'll swallow hard and
we'll take him." Clark is one of several Democratic
presidential contenders who are making a swing
through Texas this week. Earlier in the day, Sen.
John Edwards of North Carolina attended a private
fund-raiser at the home of former Austin Mayor Kirk
Watson. The Clark rally drew supporters of all ages.
"I figured the Bush economy is not exactly helping
people out like me, young professionals," said
Andrew Millspaugh, 25, an out-of-work sales
representative. "General Clark, I think, understands
our problems better." Walter and Mary Autry, a
retired couple in their 70s, drove two hours with a
group of friends from Bandera to hear Clark speak.
They cited several reasons for supporting Clark.
"He's a general. He's very intelligent. And he's a
Democrat now," Walter Autry said. …
Boston Globe online article by Thomas
Oliphant, “Past haunts Dean on Medicare issue”.
Excerpts: “Had Dick Gephardt been more
politically correct last week, he would have rebuked
Howard Dean for standing with Senator Pete Domenici
of New Mexico on proposed Medicare cutbacks in the
1990s or with then-Representative John Kasich of
Ohio. To those bosses of the newly Republican budget
committee in Congress, he could have added the GOP
revolutionaries running the House Ways and Means
Committee -- Bill Archer of Texas and Bill Thomas of
California. Newt Gingrich, however, was a lightning
rod for disbelief -- a distraction, really. Dean
expressed wounded shock and horror that anyone would
link him to the former speaker, who in turn tried to
link slashes in eligibility and other restrictions
on Medicare beneficiaries with a whopping tax cut
for high-income Americans. The truth, however, is
that as a conservative Democratic governor, Dean
really did do what Gephardt says he did, and his
shifting attempts to wiggle off that hook have made
his conduct an issue in a Democratic race that grows
more serious by the week. Ever since Gephardt --
followed by John Kerry -- raised the Medicare issue
nearly a month ago, Dean has expressed wounded
horror at the guilt by association, deplored the
tactics of "Washington politicians," and
declared Gephardt's criticisms "flat-out false."
Actually, they are flat-out true. That
becomes even more troublesome now that Dean has come
up with still another explanation for his Medicare
behavior -- Bill Clinton himself. Dean's inaccuracy
here is also instructive. I have been watching
this subplot to the Dean phenomenon for two months,
ever since Dennis Kucinich nicked him for having
supported an increase in Social Security's
eligibility age -- a criticism that Dean also
initially denied and then flipped on. It has
happened on Social Security, on trade, on
middle-class taxes, on budget-balancing policies.
Medicare is an especially big enchilada. For
Gephardt to raise it is of special significance in
Iowa, where he and Dean are in a dogfight in a place
that has the fourth-highest concentration of retired
people in the country. Dean will plead guilty to
having supported a slowdown in Medicare's rate of
spending growth (from 10 to 7 percent annually) --
an innocuous-sounding, almost accountant-like budget
position. In fact, the proposal he supported would
have restricted eligibility, called on some retired
people to pay more, and used force more than
incentives to require participation in managed care.
Gephardt himself might be guilty of excessive
force in using Gingrich's name the way he has, but
the Medicare proposal was one-half of the
centerpiece of the former speaker's infamous
Contract With America (the other was the tax cut),
and the fight over it led to the weeks-long shutdown
of the government at perhaps the most climactic
domestic policy moment of the Clinton presidency.
Dean's support was especially important to the
Republicans as the House prepared to pass its
version of the proposal in 1995, but he never pulled
it back as the White House-Congress war escalated.
In the last few days, sensing the political fallout,
Dean has come up with a fresh explanation: He was
doing something that Clinton supported and actually
signed into law. This is even more misleading, an
apples and oranges mixture that makes what happened
two years later sound like what happened in 1995-96.
Nothing could be further from the truth. What
Clinton signed in 1997 was a law that finally
produced a tax cut for ordinary families
(introducing the child tax credit, subsequent
increases in which Dean now says he wants repealed),
and containing spending cuts to pay for it. It is
often referred to as the Balanced Budget Act, but in
fact it was the booming economy that produced the
huge surplus at the end of the '90s. This law, more
accurately, produced a tax cut that was responsibly
funded. The spending cuts included a large bite
out of Medicare but not the same kind of bite the
Republicans fought for with Dean's help in '95.
This time around, instead of attacking the
beneficiaries (which Clinton opposed), it reduced
Medicare payments to providers like hospitals,
nursing homes, and physicians. By bipartisan
consensus it went too far, especially in its harmful
effect on large teaching hospitals, and much of the
money has since been restored. Dean now says his
willingness to go after middle-class entitlements
reflected the deficit crisis of the mid-'90s, but
this is also a misleading position. The fact is
that the deficit reduction program enacted in
Clinton's first year had already put the country on
the right road. What the Republicans were pushing in
'95 was revolution. Moreover, the reemergence of
fiscal crisis has made Dean's views in the mid-'90s
relevant: He has said Medicare should again be on
the table if he is president. Bottom line:
Gephardt and Kerry have a legitimate point, and Dean
will have trouble expanding his remarkable base to
the elderly and to voters of moderate means unless
he does a more forthright job of facing up to his
past. …
Washington Post online article by Nedra
Pickler, “Hart Endorses Kerry’s White House Bid”.
Excerpts: “Gary Hart, the former Colorado senator
who sought the presidency twice in the 1980s,
announced Tuesday that he is backing Democrat John
Kerry's White House bid. Hart, who toyed with
running for president again this year but decided
against it in May, said Kerry is the best
qualified to be president in the field of 10
Democrats because of his experience in foreign
policy, budget negotiations and the military as a
Vietnam veteran. "It takes years of preparation
and we just don't hold our candidates to that
standard," Hart said. But while backing Kerry,
Hart said he told the presidential hopeful that he
doesn't think endorsements mean much in the
presidential race. Still, Kerry said Hart has "a
voice of consequence, of real weight" and
contributes unique expertise in national security
and grass-roots politics. Hart's first presidential
campaign was in 1984, the same year Kerry was
elected senator from Massachusetts. Kerry and
Hart served together for two years until Hart left
the Senate, but said they have known each other
since the early '70s. Hart served as George
McGovern's campaign manager in the 1972
Democratic nominee's unsuccessful bid for the
presidency. Hart was elected to the Senate in 1974.
Hart won the New Hampshire presidential primary in
1984, but lost the nomination to Walter Mondale. In
the warmup to the 1988 race, Hart was off to a fast
start but was forced out after stories surfaced of
his extramarital involvement with model Donna Rice.
During his 15 years out of politics, Hart has been
busy practicing law, writing more than a dozen books
- both fiction and nonfiction - and offering his
expertise on the military and national security. He
was co-chairman of the U.S. Commission on National
Security, which warned several months before the
Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that the United States
faced a clear threat of foreign attack on U.S. soil
that would kill thousands. Democratic leaders in
Colorado have spoken with Hart about running next
year against Republican Sen. Ben Nighthorse
Campbell. Hart said he wants Democratic Rep. Mark
Udall to run. Asked what he would do if Udall
doesn't run, Hart said, "We'll have to see about
that."
…OpinionJournal
(Wall Street Journal) article by James
Taranto, “Warp-Speed Wesley”. Excerpts:
“Who says the Democrats don't have any new ideas?
Why, Wesley Clark's campaign Web site features
the retired general's "100 Year Vision":
Looking ahead 100 years, the United States will
be defined by our environment, both our physical
environment and our legal, Constitutional
environment.
If you think that's bold, get a load of this
report from Wired magazine, on a Clark campaign
appearance in New Hampshire, where he boldly went
where no candidate has gone before:
"I still believe in e=mc2, but I can't
believe that in all of human history, we'll never
ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to
reach where we want to go," said Clark. "I
happen to believe that mankind can do it."
"I've argued with physicists about it, I've
argued with best friends about it. I just have to
believe it. It's my only faith-based initiative."
Clark's comment prompted laughter and applause from
the gathering.
Now that Jim Traficant has withdrawn from the
presidential race, maybe Clark should pick up his
old slogan, "Beam me up, Scotty." Or how about
this: "Live long and prosper. Vote for Wesley
Clark." …
New York Times online article by Diane
Cardwell, “Mild-Mannered Senator Tries Attack-Dog
Role”. Excerpts: “Senator Bob Graham has long
enjoyed a reputation as one of the most courtly,
mild-mannered and even long-winded members of the
Senate. But on the presidential campaign trail, he
has bemused the Washington establishment by
transforming himself into a one-man grenade
launcher. His target is President Bush.
Struggling for attention as he trails badly in the
polls and in fund-raising, Mr. Graham, a Florida
Democrat, frequently and uncharacteristically
upbraids Mr. Bush, especially for what he considers
his national security lapses. Mr. Graham
often goes beyond his Democratic rivals in skewering
the administration — even, at times, beyond
Howard Dean, for whom harsh Bush attacks have become
expected. Mr. Graham has baldly answered "Yes"
when asked if Mr. Bush intentionally misled
Americans in waging war with Iraq, and has called
for his impeachment. Mr. Graham, who was
chairman of the Senate intelligence committee at the
time of the Sept. 11 attacks, insists that his
remarks are heartfelt. But many Democrats say they
also reflect the frustration of a respected veteran
of Capitol Hill who has yet to become a factor in
the contest. His campaign appears in such dire
shape that Mr. Graham is expected to have raised
only a paltry sum for the quarter that ends today.
His fund-raising coordinators for New York and
California resigned in recent weeks, and one joined
the campaign of Gen. Wesley K. Clark. The
senator's own expectations are so low that he said
he would consider it a victory if he placed third or
fourth in the Iowa and New Hampshire contests, which
he said he could then use as a springboard to a
better showing in the Sun Belt. Mr. Graham rejects
the idea that he is taking potshots at the president
and suggests that he was spurred to run by outrage.
"I don't consider the words to be strident, I
consider them to be an accurate description," he
said. "Yes, we have pointed out where I think this
administration has taken us in the wrong direction,
but I also believe it's incumbent upon a challenger
to have something constructive to say." But
Representative Jim Davis, a Florida Democrat who
backs Mr. Graham, said there was a pragmatic
explanation for Mr. Graham's newfound outspokenness.
"I think that what Bob Graham is doing," he said,
"is working to be heard in what has become a very
crowded and complicated race." In Baltimore, Mr.
Graham declared that Mr. Bush "knew or should have
known" that "there was no relationship between Osama
Been Forgotten and Saddam Hussein." In Des Moines,
he said the United States was no safer than it was
on Sept. 11, 2001, because "this president does not
understand what it's going to take to win the war on
terrorism." In Denver, he accused the administration
of giving away billions "to Vice President Dick
Cheney's friends at Halliburton to rebuild Iraqi oil
fields." And at the debate in New York last week,
none of the candidates went as far as Mr. Graham in
taking on Mr. Bush. Answering a question about how
to control prescription drug prices, Mr. Graham
said nothing would be done as long as Mr. Bush
remained in office because "he is literally in bed
with the pharmaceutical companies." Stephen
Craig, a political science professor at the
University of Florida, said of Mr. Graham, "He
has clearly decided to throw some bombs, and Bob
Graham as a bomb-thrower is sort of an oxymoron for
those of us who have watched him for a
quarter-century."
*
ON THE BUSH BEAT:
…On the Wall Street Journal’s
Best of The Web, “Plame-Out?”. Excerpts: “Anti-Bush
partisans are really piling on thick over the
purported scandal involving the "outing," supposedly
by White House officials, of Valerie Plame, who may
or may not have been a covert CIA operative, and who
is married to a critic of the administration named
Joe Wilson. Josh Marshall blogged himself into
such a frenzy yesterday that he almost matched Glenn
Reynolds's output on a slow day. One random
left-wing blogger sums up the tone of the attacks:
"Conservatives have a long history in America of
resorting to traitorous acts to further their own
private agendas." We're half-expecting the
bestseller lists to feature a book called "Leaks and
the Leaking Leakers Who Leak Them." But it's not
clear if there's anything to this at all. The
whole thing got started in July, when Robert
Novak published a column mentioning that
Plame was a CIA "operative." Then, as we noted
yesterday, various left-wing journalists, apparently
egged on by Wilson, started claiming that Plame was
a covert operative--and therefore that
blowing her cover was potentially illegal--even
though neither Novak nor Wilson nor the CIA has
identified her as such. Yesterday on CNN's
"Crossfire," of which he is a co-host, Novak had
this to say: “Nobody in the Bush administration
called me to leak this. In July, I was
interviewing a senior administration official on
Ambassador Wilson's report when he told me the trip
was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on
weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official
told me the same thing. As a professional journalist
with 46 years experience in Washington, I do not
reveal confidential sources. When I called the CIA
in July, they confirmed Mrs. Wilson's involvement in
a mission for her husband on a secondary basis, who
is--he is a former Clinton administration official.
They asked me not to use her name, but never
indicated it would endanger her or anybody else.
According to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs.
Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert
operative, and not in charge of undercover
operatives.” That last sentence is the key:
If Novak's source is telling the truth, then there's
no crime, and the "scandal" is utterly phony.”
…
Union Leader online article by senior
political reporter John DeStaso, “Bush expected to
visit Granite State on Oct. 9”. Excerpts:
“President George W. Bush is expected to make his
fourth visit to the Granite State as the nation’s
chief executive on Thursday, Oct. 9, with the prime
event expected to be a business luncheon at
Manchester’s Center of New Hampshire Holiday Inn.
The plans were not definite yesterday, and sources
cautioned that they could still change. But
invitations for the luncheon are expected to be sent
out as soon as tomorrow, sources said. A second Bush
stop is possible in the southern or central part of
the state, but the site had not been decided upon by
planners last night, sources said. An administration
spokesman yesterday neither confirmed nor denied The
Union Leader’s information, saying only, “We’ve made
no announcement about the President’s travel plans
beyond the end of this week.” Tentative plans
call for Bush to deliver an economic and foreign
policy address at a midday luncheon co-sponsored by
the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce and the
Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire.
Other organizations, including the New Hampshire
High Technology Council, also may be involved in
sponsorship. It would be an official,
taxpayer-funded visit, sources said. Last week’s
stop in the state by Vice President Richard Cheney
was funded by, and raised money for, the Bush-Cheney
’04 campaign committee. A Bush Manchester luncheon
would be by invitation only, sources said, with the
$50-per-ticket proceeds going to the sponsoring
organizations to defray expenses. Although it
would be an official visit, Bush would certainly
steal the political spotlight that day from the
Democratic Presidential candidates, who have been
crisscrossing the state blasting Bush almost daily.
Republican officials long ago promised that as the
Democrats stepped up their attacks on Bush, the
President’s team would answer by sending
high-ranking administration officials as Bush
surrogates to the First in the Nation Primary state.
In the past month alone, Attorney General John
Ashcroft, Secretary of Homeland Security Thomas
Ridge, Undersecretary of Homeland Security Asa
Hutchinson and Cheney have been to the state.
The White House listed all but Cheney’s stop as
official visits. Four years ago, Bush virtually
lived in New Hampshire as the front-running
candidate in a crowded GOP Presidential Primary
field. He lost the primary in an upset by Arizona
Sen. John McCain, but went on to secure the
Republican nomination. Bush narrowly won New
Hampshire’s four electoral votes in November 2000.” …
YahooNews is carrying a report by
Associated Press writer Tom Raum, “Bush Promises to
Tackle Economy, Iraq”. Excerpts: “CHICAGO -
President Bush pledged to finish what his
administration had begun, both abroad and at home,
as he raised $6 million more for his re-election
campaign with visits to two electorally pivotal
Midwestern industrial states. Brushing aside
rising Democratic criticism about his handling of
the economy and Iraq, the president told supporters
on Tuesday, "We're laying the foundations for
greater prosperity and economic vitality and more
jobs across America." The president spoke
following disappointing reports on consumer
confidence and Midwest business activity. Bush was
traveling later to Cincinnati for another
fund-raiser, and was expected to have raised his
campaign bank account to over $82 million by day's
end. Together, Illinois and Ohio, two Rust Belt
industrial states, have lost 280,000 manufacturing
jobs since Bush took office. "So long as anybody in
America who wants to work is looking for a job, I
will work hard to make conditions for economic
growth positive," Bush told about 1,700 supporters
at a hotel luncheon. He also addressed business
leaders at the University of Chicago School of
Business. Bush pressed ahead with his re-election
fund-raising tour in the face of slumping job
approval ratings and new questions about his
administration's conduct in making its case for war
in Iraq. Before leaving Washington, Bush
instructed his staff to cooperate with a Justice
Department investigation into whether the
administration improperly disclosed the name of a
covert CIA officer whose husband had criticized
Bush's war rationale. "If there's a leak in my
administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told
reporters during a picture-taking session with
business leaders. Earlier, Bush did not mention the
issue in his speech at the fund-raising luncheon,
nor the demands from Democrats for the appointment
of a special outside counsel to investigate the
leak. But he did tell his audience that he and
GOP leaders such as House Speaker Dennis Hastert,
R-Ill., were working with him to try "to get rid of
this needless partisan bickering that dominates the
Washington, D.C., landscape and the zero sum
politics of Washington." Hastert introduced Bush at
the luncheon, calling the president "a man of his
word. He does what he says regardless of which way
the political winds might be blowing." Bush
acknowledged gloomy unemployment statistics amid
other signs of a recovering economy. But, he
suggested the impact of the two major tax cuts he
pushed through Congress would eventually help to
lift the overall economy. "When Americans have more
take-home pay to spend, save or invest, the whole
economy grows, and more people are likely to find a
job," he said. Earlier Tuesday, the New York-based
Conference Board reported that consumer confidence,
which had rebounded in August, took a bigger than
expected drop in September due to the sluggish job
market. On Iraq, Bush said, "Saddam holdouts and
foreign terrorists are desperately trying to throw
Iraq into chaos by attacking coalition forces and
aid workers and innocent Iraqis." "This
collection of killers is trying to shake the will of
America and the civilized world. But America will
not be intimidated," he said. "We will finish what
we have begun and win this essential victory in the
war on terror."
*
THE CLINTON COMEDIES:
… On the Wall Street Journals
Best of the Web, “The Clinton Factor”.
Excerpts: “One of the most interesting--and
underreported--questions in the recent Gallup poll
of Californians was No. 14, which asked voters how
Bill Clinton's campaigning against Gray Davis's
recall affected their views. Among registered
voters, 18% said Clinton's presence made them
"more likely" to vote for the recall, vs.
just 12% who said "less likely."
Sixty-eight percent said it made no difference.
For "probable voters" the negative Clinton effect
was greater still: 22% more likely, 11% less, 66% no
difference. This from a state where Clinton got
a majority of the vote in 1996. It's further
evidence of our theory that Clinton's political
talent isn't transferable to other candidates--and
it could bode ill for the campaign of Wesley Clark.”
*
WAR/TERROR:
…
FoxNews.com story by the Associated Press,”North
Korea Insists It Won’t Go Back to Nuke Talks Without
U.S. Concessions”. Excerpts: “A top North
Korean official said Tuesday that Pyongyang would
not return to talks on the nuclear crisis unless
Washington takes "simultaneous action" to meet its
demands, saying it makes no sense for the communist
country to "put down the guns first." North
Korea has repeatedly said it is not interested in
further negotiations, but Vice Foreign Minister Choe
Su Hon used his address to the U.N. General
Assembly to present his government's case in
detail. The North tends to escalate its harsh
rhetoric when it wants to extract concessions before
talks. Choe accused the United States of insisting
that North Korea take "all actions first," saying
this was the hostile policy of a superpower seeking
to overthrow the government by force. "Simultaneous
action is a realistic way of denuclearizing the
Korean peninsula, and any opposition to it is
tantamount to the refusal of the denuclearization,"
Choe warned in his address to the assembly's annual
ministerial meeting. Washington demands that the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea, known as the DPRK,
must dismantle its nuclear programs first. Pyongyang
says it will do so only if the United States signs a
nonaggression treaty, provides economic aid and
opens diplomatic ties. "Under the present
circumstance in which the DPRK and the United States
are leveling guns at each other, asking the other
party to put down the guns first does not make any
sense," Choe said. "This can be construed only as an
ulterior intention to disarm and kill the DPRK."
Richard Grenell, a spokesman for U.S. Ambassador
John Negroponte, said: "It's certainly typical
language that we hear from the North Koreans and
we're not surprised."
*
NATIONAL POLITICS:
…
Washington Post online column by Nedra
Pickler reports that media mogul Robert
Johnson says his Black Entertainment Television
network will produce and air more than $1 million
worth of ads encouraging young people to register
and vote. The nonpartisan ads will feature
well-known entertainers and other high-profile
figures encouraging people to get involved in the
political process and not allow themselves to be
marginalized. Johnson also has pledged $250,000
of his own money to the effort. "The 2000
presidential election raised many issues with the
voting public," Johnson said in a statement. "This
voter registration campaign will endeavor to ensure
that the public is aware of the importance of its
vote." BET is launching the ad campaign together
with the National Action Network, the nonprofit
social justice organization founded by presidential
candidate Al Sharpton but will not attempt to
promote any particular political candidate. Their
goal is to help register a million new voters by
spring 2004.
… On the Wall Street Journal’s
Best of the Web, “Kennedy vs Kennedy”.
Excerpt: “A Democratic congressman from Rhode Island
is criticizing Sen. Edward Kennedy for his unsober
remarks about President Bush and Iraq. "I don't
agree with his stance," the Boston Herald quotes
the Rhode Island congressman as saying of Kennedy.
"I believe that the U.N. needs to be a viable
international organization and the only way it is
viable is if its proclamations and resolutions are
enforced." If Saddam Hussein lacked weapons
of mass destruction, the Rhode Islander asks, "then
how come he gassed all his people with them? The
fact is, he definitely had them. Whether he
destroyed them or not is up for debate. But he had
them and he's got a propensity for invading
neighboring countries and causing instability in a
part of the world [where] we can't afford to have a
lot of instability." The congressman saying these
sensible things is Patrick Kennedy, Teddy's son.
Maybe we shouldn't be surprised by this generation
gap. After all, President Bush is a lot tougher than
his father on Saddam Hussein.”
*FEDERAL
ISSUES:
…
Houston Chronicle
article by AP’s Suzanne Gamboa, “DeLay: Guest
worker program ‘vitally important’”. Excerpts:
“WASHINGTON -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay
said Tuesday "it is vitally important this country
have some sort of guest worker program" but insisted
illegal immigrants should not be given amnesty.
DeLay said he does not have an opinion on a bill
introduced last week that would allow about 500,000
undocumented immigrant farmworkers already in the
country to become legal residents and make employing
farm labor easier. But he did endorse the idea of a
guest worker program. "Coming from Texas, more
specifically born in Laredo and raised in South
Texas, it is vitally important this country have
some sort of guest worker program," said DeLay,
R-Sugar Land. "It is only fair to those here in
the United States who need the workers and it is
doubly fair to the families, Mexicans that need the
work." The farmworker legislation has bipartisan
sponsors and support and was drafted by an unlikely
alliance of agricultural industry groups, unions and
immigration advocates. The two sides have warred
with each other for decades over work conditions and
wages for farmworkers. Under the legislation,
temporary workers status would be given to eligible
undocumented farmworkers now in the United States.
Their spouses and children also would be allowed to
remain in the United States. Eventually, after a
longer period of work, these workers and their
families would be eligible for permanent residency.
The legislation also would simplify the H2A visa
program, through which farmers and other
employers can hire workers for agricultural jobs.
The legislation would ease some of the program's
rules. Supporters say the bill providing the
workers with a path to legal permanent residence is
not amnesty because workers must earn the legal
status with work. They say the legalization helps
protect workers from abuse and exploitation. But
opponents say it encourages more illegal
immigration.
click here
Paid
for by the Iowa Presidential Watch PAC
P.O.
Box 171, Webster City, IA 50595
privacy
/ agreement
/
/ homepage
/
search engine |
