|
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 Thursday, September 25, 2003 ...
QUOTABLE: evening quote:
“Nobody up here deserves to be compared to Newt
Gingrich…We
need to remember that the enemy here is George Bush,
not each other.” – Dean, responding to
Gephardt in wannabes NYC debate… midday quotes:
“Graham's political
team is more pessimistic than the candidate, who
is still peppering aides with long-range ideas for
an aggressive campaign, officials said. But
Graham may soon have to decide whether to overhaul
his campaign or even drop out, they said.” –
AP’s Ron Fournier, in report posted this
afternoon on latimes.com·
“It's clearly a two-person race at
the moment in New Hampshire, but Clark has
established a presence there and is a force to be
reckoned with.” -- Lee Miringoff, director of Marist
College Institute of Public Opinion…
·
"Some ask, 'How can you criticize
the president at a time of war?'" said Clark. "I
answer: 'How can you not?'"
·
"I think these guys are cutting
their own throats" Howard Dean, commenting on
rivals’ negative attacks
·
"That question makes me wish it
were vodka..” Retired Gen. Henry H. Shelton, former
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, responding to
question about supporting Clark’s candidacy
·
“I've known Wes for a long time. I
will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early
had to do with integrity and character issues,
things that are very near and dear to my hear…Wes
won’t get my vote.” – Former Joint Chiefs chair Hugh
Sheldon, commenting on fellow general Clark
·
'You're either with us, or you're
with the terrorists,' " Mr. DeLay told the Heritage
Foundation yesterday.
·
"They have allowed their cause to
be bullied by people who believe vandalizing
Starbucks represents a legitimate foreign-policy
issue," Tom DeLay on Dem leadership.
·
"while he was voting for Richard
Nixon and for Ronald Reagan, I was fighting against
their policies." – John Kerry on Wesley Clark’s
voting record
·
"When the president during the
campaign said he was against nation building, I
didn't realize he meant our nation." – Al Franken,
on what he’ll open with at tonight’s Democratic
National Committee's second presidential dinner
·
"The parallels to Clinton are
tremendous in that they are both brilliant. Clark is
that kind of smart,” -- Clark adviser Michael Frisby
·
“They censored my book, just like
they tried to censor me," – Hillary, commenting on
China’s cleansing of her book
·
“The former lawmaker, who is not
allowed to take phone calls that haven't been
approved in advance, could not be reached for
comment.” – AP report on ex-Congressman James
Traficant’s to end bid to move from PA prison cell
to Oval Office
·
“I actually propose that we all
call ourselves pro-life. We care about life.” –
Dean, proposing that pro-choice Dems just claim they
are pro-life
·
“The new, more combative tone
reflects the increasing pressure on all the leading
candidates to differentiate themselves from the
crowd.” – Washington Post’s Jim VandeHei, reporting
today on the increasing trend for the Dem wannabes
to attack each other
·
“I would hate to have Tom DeLay,
who exterminates cockroaches when he is not in
Congress, decide what my medical needs are.” – Dean … Among
the offerings in today’s update:
evening offering:
Dem wannabes tangle –against each other – but
Clark skates through his first debate. On the
other hand, the Dem hopefuls don’t hesitate when
it comes to going after each other… midday offering:
Edwards poll shows the NC Sen has taken 10-point
lead – at 23% -- in South Carolina, Clark (13%) only
other wannabe in double digits, Lieberman & Sharpton
next at 8%…
· Report
today:
Edwards missed 38 of 42 Senate votes since Senate
returned from August recess…
Wayward wannabe Graham strays further off
campaign course: AP report says Florida senator’s
campaign in “peril.” Graham expected to miss 9/30
fundraising goals after NY and CA coordinators
quit…
New poll today: Dean up by 12 over
Kerry in NH, Clark only other wannabe in double
digits, six in 10 don’t want Hillary in the mix,
seven in 10 oppose a Gore rerun…
·
Dem wannabes – like vultures –
start circling each other. Washington Post reports
today that attacks are “turning more negative and
more personal”
·
Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff: Clark recalled from NATO command because
of "integrity and character issues."
·
Boston Globe’s Joanna Weiss: Clark
sees new kind of combat
·
Money-powered Dean -- Dean sets a
party record on funds
·
Fireworks in California last night…
tonight’s Dem debate begs the question: “If Clark is
Schwarzenegger, who is Huffington?”
·
Greg Pierce dishes up a “Reno's
rant” report
·
China takes on the rath of Hillary
by censoring “Living History”
·
OnPolitics writer Terry M. Teal
analysis, “The General Takes the Field”
·
No
big surprise here -- Healthcare reform appears
unlikely, or at least delayed.
·
Inside the Beltway
on Inside the Clinton marriage: Beltway reads the
new psychological Bill Bio
·
Washington Post this morning:
Tonight’s debate to feature most heated,
finger-pointing exchanges of the campaign yet.
Report says top Dem wannabes going on attack more
and more – against each other
·
Former Joint Chiefs chair Sheldon
raises questions about Clark’s past, says he won’t
vote for The General
·
No 11th wannabe bid for now:
Ex-Congressman – and PA jailbird – Traficant ends
bid for the Oval Office
·
Poll: New Yorkers oppose Hillary
prez bid in 2004
·
FOXNews.com report: Washington
lawmakers accuse Saudi Arabia of not doing enough to
address terrorist threats All these stories below and more. *
CANDIDATES/CAUCUSES: Evening
… “Clark in Spotlight as Democratic Candidates
Debate…Candidates Argue Over Tax Cuts, Medicare
and Job Losses” -- headline from washingtonpost.com.
Excerpt from Ron Fournier’s coverage of the NYC Dem
debate: “Retired Gen. Wesley Clark presented his
credentials as a Democrat on Thursday with a biting
attack on President Bush, then joined nine
presidential rivals in a mix-it-up debate over tax
cuts, Medicare and the job-shedding economy.
Bush is ‘a man who recklessly cut taxes, who
recklessly took us into war in Iraq,’ said the
newcomer to the race and his party, confronted with
favorable comments he made about the Republican
president as recently as 2001. For the most part,
Clark's rivals avoided criticizing him throughout
the two-hour debate -- but not so one another.
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts seemed eager
for combat early, criticizing former Vermont Gov.
Howard Dean for favoring a repeal of all of
Bush's tax cuts to finance health care expansion and
other programs. It is ‘absolutely wrong’ to propose
eliminating all cuts, said Kerry, who favors
scaling back tax cuts for the wealthy while
maintaining them for lower and middle income
Americans. Dean, ahead of his fellow New
Englander in the latest poll in advance of the New
Hampshire primary, picked up that challenge quickly.
‘This is exactly why the budget is so far out of
balance. Washington politicians promising
everything,’ he said. ‘We cannot win as
Democrats’ that way, he chastised Kerry.
‘Tell the truth,’ he prodded the Massachusetts
senator. Dean said that among the candidates,
only he and Sen. Bob Graham of Florida -- also a
former governor -- had ever balanced budgets.
With Graham's campaign in financial trouble,
that remark amounted to an appeal to the Floridian's
supporters to give his own economic credentials a
look. Still later, Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri
saw an opening to attack Dean. He assailed the
former governor for having criticized Medicare in
the past, and said he had agreed with ‘the very plan
that Newt Gingrich wanted to pass, which was a $270
billion cut" in the program that provides health
care to seniors.’ At the time, Gephardt said,
he was the Democratic leader in the House, leading
the fight against plans promoted by the former
Speaker and champion of the GOP revolution in
Congress. Referring to Dean's
self-description as the candidate of the Democratic
wing of the Democratic party, Gephardt said,
‘I think you're just winging it.’…’That is flat-out
false and I'm ashamed you would compare me with Newt
Gingrich,’ Dean said in response. ‘Nobody
up here deserves to be compared to Newt Gingrich’...We
need to remember that the enemy here is George Bush,
not each other.’ Kerry returned to the
same issue moments later, saying he wanted to come
to Gephardt's defense. ‘I didn't hear him say
he was like Newt Gingrich. I heard him say he stood
with Newt Gingrich when we were struggling to hold
onto Medicare,’ he said. The event at Pace
University was the latest in a series of debates
sponsored by the Democratic Party, and billed in
advance as a clash over economic issues.” Midday … Edwards claims
lead – 23% -- in poll released by his campaign with
The General second, Lieberman and Sharpton next, and
Dean at 7%. Gephardt, Moseley Braun, Graham all lead
Kerry’s 3% showing. From poll released this
morning by the Edwards campaign: Edwards
gains nine points since June, Lieberman drops nine
percent since June. Coverage by John Wagner of
the News & Observer of Raleigh: “U.S. Sen. John
Edwards has a 10-point lead in the early
presidential primary state of South Carolina,
according to an internal poll released by his
campaign Thursday morning. The poll,
conducted between Saturday and Monday by Edwards'
pollster, Harrison Hickman, shows the North
Carolina Democrat drawing support from 23 percent of
likely Democratic primary voters. The only other
candidate in double digits was retired Gen. Wesley
Clark of Arkansas, with 13 percent. Clark
was followed by U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman of
Connecticut and the Rev. Al Sharpton of New
York, both with 8 percent; former Vermont Gov.
Howard Dean, with 7 percent; U.S. Rep.
Richard Gephardt of Missouri, with 6 percent;
former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun of
Illinois, with 5 percent; U.S. Sen. Bob Graham
of Florida, with 4 percent; U.S. Sen. John Kerry
of Massachusetts, with 3 percent; and U.S. Rep.
Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, with 1 percent.
The poll found 23 percent remain undecided in South
Carolina, which holds its presidential primary
on Feb. 3, a week after New Hampshire. Edwards'
support has grown by 9 percentage points since June,
according to Hickman. In a poll he conducted then,
Lieberman was leading the field in South
Carolina, with 17 percent.”
… “Graham Aides Fret Over Poor Fund Raising”
– headline posted this afternoon on latimes.com (Los
Angeles Times). Report – by AP political ace Ron
Fournier – says the FL Sen has lost fundraising
coordinators in California and New York.
Excerpt: “Democratic presidential candidate Bob
Graham is experiencing serious fund-raising problems
that have put his campaign in peril, officials
close to the Florida senator said Thursday.
Published reports had suggested Graham would
raise $4 million to $5 million in the fund-raising
quarter that ends Sept. 30, but he will raise
less than that, said three campaign officials
who spoke on condition of anonymity. His
fund-raising coordinators for cash-rich California
and New York quit the campaign in the last week,
officials said. One of them has signed on with
former Gen. Wesley Clark, who entered the
race Sept. 17 as the 10th Democratic candidate. The
Democratic candidates were meeting here Thursday for
an economic debate. Graham's political team is
more pessimistic than the candidate, who is still
peppering aides with long-range ideas for an
aggressive campaign, officials said. But Graham may
soon have to decide whether to overhaul his campaign
or even drop out, they said. No decision will be
made before the fund-raising period ends, officials
said, because there is still hope for a rush of
money at the end. One of the officials said there
won't be serious discussions about the campaign's
future until the first or second week of October.
Graham has one of the best resumes in the
race: former governor and one of the most popular
politicians in Florida, a key battleground state;
moderate Democrat, and former chairman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee. He has specialized in
intelligence matters and the war on terrorism in the
Senate, becoming one of President Bush's most
fervent critics on Iraq. But his low-key,
grandfatherly style has yet to grab the attention of
Democratic voters in key states. He consistently
places near the bottom in Iowa and New Hampshire
polls, and has not significantly raised his national
standing as a candidate.”
“Edwards Has Missed 90% Of Senate
Votes” – headline posted today on the DRUDGE REPORT. The report: “How much have Sen. John Edwards' presidential ambitions
affected his current job? Here's one yardstick: This month, he
has made more trips to early nominating states than to the Senate
floor. Edwards, a North
Carolina Democrat, has missed 38 of the 42 roll-call votes since the
U.S. Senate returned from its August recess, Winston-Salem Journal
reported Thursday. His record is hardly unusual
for a presidential candidate. In fact, it is better than the three
other Senate Democrats in the race. But Republican critics have
seized upon his absences to argue that Edwards -- who announced this
month that he won't seek re-election to the Senate -- should go
ahead and step down. But Edwards said that
he plans to serve out his term and that his attention to North
Carolina issues has not waned. And he says ‘that his voting
record is a poor gauge of his involvement in Senate business.’”
… New polling shows Dean holding gap over Kerry
in New Hampshire with Clark only other double-digit
player. Headline from late morning dispatch on
washingtonpost.com: “Poll: Dean Leads Kerry in
New Hampshire” From AP coverage: “Democratic
presidential hopeful Howard Dean holds a
double-digit lead over rival John Kerry in a poll of
New Hampshire's Democratic voters released Thursday.
The poll by Marist College's Institute for Public
Opinion had Dean, the former Vermont governor, at 36
percent, Massachusetts Sen. Kerry at 24 percent and
former Gen. Wesley Clark, who entered the race last
week, at 8 percent. When independents who have
expressed an interest in voting in the Democratic
primary - as is allowed in the Granite State -- are
included in the mix, Dean leads with 35
percent followed by Kerry at 22 percent and
Clark at 11 percent. None of the other
contenders broke double digits. ‘It's clearly a
two-person race at the moment in New Hampshire, but
Clark has established a presence there and is
a force to be reckoned with,’ said Lee Miringoff,
head of the Poughkeepsie, N.Y.-based institute.
Other polls also have shown Dean leading the
10-candidate Democratic field in New Hampshire.
The state's primary, tentatively scheduled for Jan.
27, is considered a key early test for the
candidates. Among the potential Democratic
primary voters, the poll found that 62 percent do
not want New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to
enter the race and 71 percent are opposed to Al Gore
entering the race. The former first lady and
one-time vice president have said they have no plans
to run. The telephone poll of 469 registered
Democrats and independents interested in voting in
the Democratic primary was conducted Monday and
Tuesday and had a margin of error of plus or minus
4.5 percentage points. The sampling based on
responses from the 260 Democrats questioned had a
margin of error of plus or minus 6 percentage
points.”
… “Wes Won’t Get My Vote” – subhead from
yesterday’s “The Best of the Web Today” on
OpinionJournal.com (Wall Street Journal). Coverage
by “Web” columnist James Taranto: “Hugh Shelton,
who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the
time of the Sept. 11 attacks, has some harsh words
for a fellow former general. The Los Altos
(Calif.) Town Crier reports on Shelton's appearance
at a local college: ‘What do you think of General
Wesley Clark and would you support him as a
presidential candidate,’ was the question put to him
by moderator Dick Henning, assuming that all
military men stood in support of each other. General
Shelton took a drink of water and Henning said, ‘I
noticed you took a drink on that one!’…’That
question makes me wish it were vodka,’ said Shelton.
‘I've known Wes for a long time. I will
tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had
to do with integrity and character issues, things
that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not
going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat.
I'll just say Wes won't get my vote.’”
… Greg Pierce on
InsidePolitics/WashingtonTimes.com: “Straight,
no chaser”… Excerpts: “Retired Gen. Henry H.
Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, says Democratic presidential candidate
Wesley Clark was recalled from his NATO
command after the Bosnian war because of
"integrity and character issues." Mr. Shelton
said he would not vote for Mr. Clark. Mr.
Shelton's remarks came at a forum in Los Altos,
Calif., earlier this month. They were reported by
Joan Garvin of the Town Crier, the local newspaper.
"What do you think of General Wesley Clark
and would you support him as a presidential
candidate?" the forum moderator, Dick Henning, asked
the general. Mr. Shelton hesitated, taking a
drink of water, which led the moderator to
remark, "I noticed you took a drink on that one."
Mr. Shelton replied: "That question makes me
wish it were vodka. I've known Wes for a long
time. I will tell you the reason he came out of
Europe early had to do with integrity and character
issues, things that are very near and dear to my
heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican
or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my
vote."
… Today’s Dem debate preview: “Democrats
Picking at Nearest Targets: Each Other…Tome of
Rivalry for Presidential Nomination Turns Harsher as
Finger-Pointing Begins Among Top Five” – headline
from this morning’s Washington Post. Report – an
excerpt – by the Post’s Jim VandeHei: “The
Democratic presidential race, a rather collegial
affair for much of the past year, is turning more
negative and more personal as several leading
candidates seek to distinguish themselves and
discredit their rivals. With five of the 10
Democratic candidates consistently bunched near the
top of recent national polls, several are looking to
protect or improve their standing by hitting their
nearest rivals -- sometimes using questionable
charges or remarks made nearly a decade ago. Rep.
Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), who until recently
rarely attacked by name, is slamming Howard Dean --
the favorite target of several campaigns -- for
abandoning Democrats in past fights over gun
control, trade and Medicare. Gephardt is
unleashing his attack in speeches, ads, press
releases and a new Web site: Deanfacts.com, which
accuses the former governor of advocating unpopular
changes to Medicare and Social Security in the
mid-1990s. Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) is whacking
Gephardt and Dean for allegedly telling voters
‘America can retreat from the global economy,’ as
part of their trade policies, even though neither
has made such remarks. Kerry has gone after
Dean in a more personal way, telling a reporter
this past weekend the Vermont Democrat is not
qualified to be president because he makes too many
gaffes on the campaign trail. Retired Army Gen.
Wesley K. Clark is feeling the intensifying heat,
too, as Kerry and aides to other candidates question
Clark's commitment to the party. Just weeks ago,
Clark announced he was a Democrat. The new,
more combative tone reflects the increasing pressure
on all the leading candidates to differentiate
themselves from the crowd. With the books about to
close on the third-quarter fundraising period, the
Democrats are scrambling to show voters and donors
they have not just the message but also the muscle
to defeat President Bush. The candidates vacuumed up
the easiest-to-get money during the first half of
the year, so they are facing a more discerning crowd
of party faithful who want to see signs of life and
momentum before cutting checks. Several
campaigns predicted today's debate in New York will
feature the most pointed and personal exchanges
yet. The campaign is swinging into a critical
phase, when more voters are tuning in to the race
and the contests are starting to take shape in early
voting states. Gephardt, for
instance, is going after Dean, in large part
because the former governor is eating into his
support in Iowa, a must-win state for the Missouri
congressman. It may be working: Erik Smith,
Gephardt's spokesman, said Gephardt will raise more
this quarter than he did during the last one, when
the candidate was more collegial. In many ways,
Gephardt and Kerry are following the
lead of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), who
has been highly critical of Dean, some of his
other rivals and many Democrats for months.
Lieberman's harsh critiques helped define him as the
most conservative Democrat in the race. Before
Clark became a part of the race, the
calculations seemed obvious to several campaigns:
Gephardt needed to hold off Dean to win Iowa; Kerry
needed to blow past Dean to win New Hampshire; and
Lieberman and Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) needed to
bide their time and make their moves in February.
But Clark is complicating matters for all as
he jumped ahead of the pack in new national polls.
The candidates are proceeding as if Clark
never jumped in, taking a wait-and-see approach to
his candidacy, but the retired general could
undermine Gephardt, Kerry and the
other candidates if his pledge to pursue a less
divisive and more ‘patriotic’ tone takes hold,
political strategists said. Polls show voters are
turned off by harsh personal attacks, though
Democratic voters are shopping for a candidate tough
enough to go toe-to-toe with Bush. Mark Fabiani, an
adviser, said Clark will purse a ‘more
optimistic campaign’ and encourage the others ‘to
respect each other's points of view.”
… Dean sets a party
record on funds. In an article in the Boston Globe
online today, AP writer Shasron Theimer reports on
the continuing phenomena of the Dean Money Machine.
Excerpts: “WASHINGTON -- Front-runner Howard
Dean has broken President Clinton's
Democratic record for most money in a
three-month burst, while new rival Wesley Clark
is turning to some of Clinton's most loyal and
effective fund-raisers to help him jump-start his
presidential campaign. No Democrat is coming
close to President Bush's fund-raising, however.
Bush is expected to collect about $43
million by the time the third quarter ends
next Tuesday, bringing his total this year to
roughly $78 million, GOP officials said.
Dean, raising millions on the Internet, is
likely to take in $13 million to $16 million this
quarter, a campaign insider said. That would
lift him to at least $23.5 million for the race
so far and probably make him the Democratic
money leader for the year. Democratic strategists
say Dean could raise at least double what his
party's other top hopefuls will collect during the
third quarter. The former Vermont governor has
already passed the Democratic record set by
Clinton, who took in $10.3 million over
three months in 1995 for his reelection. Bush
set an overall single-quarter record in the
last period, collecting $35.1 million in his
first six weeks of the 2004 campaign, breaking the
record of about $29.7 million he set in 1999.
Clark is on pace to collect $2 million or
more by the time the fund-raising quarter ends,
after only two weeks in the Democratic race. The
retired general is getting a boost from some of
Clinton's most prolific fund-raisers. The team
includes Skip Rutherford, head of the Clinton
presidential library; New York venture capitalist
Alan Patricoff, who helped raise millions for
Clinton; Eli Segal, chief of staff to
Clinton's 1992 campaign and former head of the
AmeriCorps national service program Clinton created;
Mickey Kantor, commerce secretary under
Clinton; and Bob Burkett, a business
consultant in Washington, D.C, and Los Angeles.
John F. Kerry, Richard A. Gephardt, and
Joseph I. Lieberman are expected to be in
roughly the $4 million to $6 million range in
third-quarter fund-raising. John Edwards is
expected to come in below that, along with the other
four candidates in the 10-way Democratic race.
… Traficant – trying to move from Pennsylvania
prison cell to the White House – ends presidential
bid. Associated Press report from Cleveland: “Former
Ohio congressman James A. Traficant Jr. is no longer
seeking to trade his prison cell for the Oval
Office, campaign supporters said Wednesday. A
group that formed a presidential exploratory
committee for the ousted Democrat announced that it
will end a two-month campaign because of lack of
support. Traficant is in prison for bribery and
racketeering charges. Marcus Belk, manager of
the ‘Draft Traficant for President 2004’
campaign from Jersey City, N.J., said the group was
folding because it could not raise the $100,000
needed to qualify for federal matching funds.
The group said it had Traficant's permission
to run the campaign and Belk communicated with him
by mail. The group had set a deadline to raise the
money by Oct. 1, when the next campaign finance
reports must be filed with the Federal Election
Commission. It was not immediately clear how
much money the campaign raised. All donations will
be returned, Belk said. Traficant, who served
in the House for nine terms, was expelled from
Congress in July 2002 after being convicted of
racketeering, bribery and tax evasion. He is
serving an eight-year prison sentence at the
minimum-security Allenwood federal prison in White
Deer, Pa. The former lawmaker, who is not
allowed to take phone calls that haven't been
approved in advance, could not be reached for
comment.
… “Howard Dean’s arrogance resurfaces as he calls
abortion rights ‘pro-life’” – headline from Jack
Kenny’s column in yesterday’s the Union Leader.
Excerpt from Kenny’s column: “Howard Dean, not
content with the pro-choice label, is now urging
defenders of abortion ‘rights’ to seize the
‘pro-life’ banner as well. ‘I actually propose that
we all call ourselves pro-life,’ the former
Vermont governor and current Presidential candidate
said at a NARAL Pro-Choice America forum in
Manchester last week. ‘We care about life.’
One might assume that Dean, a medical doctor,
cares about life in at least some of its stages,
even if he remains convinced that pre-natal human
life has no right deserving of legal protection.
His own profession may have proscribed abortion for
a few millennia, but that prohibition would cramp
the style, not to mention the political ambition, of
the good Dr. Dean. No doubt there are other
provisions of the Hippocratic Oath that he finds
more in tune with his progressive thinking. ‘We
believe it’s none of the government’s business,’
said Dean, who believes nearly everything
else is. Dean, who considers abortion a
purely medical decision, is promoting a national
health care plan. He believes it is the business
of government to promote health, but not to defend
life at its earliest, most vulnerable stages. He has
no qualms about supporting federal funding of
abortions for Medicaid patients. He believes
abortion is ‘none of the government’s business,’
except when the government can sponsor and promote
it. And he’s ‘pro-life.’ But if the killing of
pre-born babies, at the rate of about 4,000 a day in
America, does not offend the good doctor’s
conscience, killing insects apparently does. In a
sneering reference to U.S. House Majority Leader Tom
DeLay, Dean turned loose this brilliant thought on
an unsuspecting world: ‘I would hate to have Tom
DeLay, who exterminates cockroaches when he is not
in Congress, decide what my medical needs are.’
DeLay, a conservative congressman and former pest
exterminator, would probably hate that, too. And
since it is Dean and not DeLay who wants to bring
the federal government more fully into the health
care business, paying health care pipers and calling
medical tunes, Dean’s comment is remarkable for its
unintended irony. It is even more remarkable for
its condescending tone, not to mention the utter
tastelessness of bringing the issue of exterminating
insects into a discussion of human abortions.
Apparently, Tom DeLay, who once killed roaches for a
living, will never be fit to enter the moral and
intellectual high ground occupied by Howard Dean,
who defends the killing of human babies as a matter
of personal ‘choice.’ And oh, yes, I almost
forgot. He’s ‘pro-life,’ too.”
… Boston Globe
writer Joanna Weiss: “Clark sees new kind
of combat” … Excerpts: “In the week and a day
since he entered the presidential race, retired Army
General Wesley K. Clark has found himself in
the center of the whirlwind. Heading into
a debate today that will be an early test of his
candidacy, he's got an instant lead in two
national polls, instant attention from the media,
and instant scrutiny from his rivals. Today's
Democratic forum in New York will focus on
economics, but Clark's nine opponents may be poised
to fixate on Clark's perceived weaknesses:
his evolving position on the war in Iraq and
his credentials as a Democrat, after telling
reporters last week that he voted for President
Reagan. And yesterday, as Clark called for
significant cuts in President Bush's tax cuts to
fund a $100 billion plan that would create jobs and
boost homeland security, his campaign had to address
a public snipe from retired Army General
H. Hugh Shelton, who was chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff when Clark headed
NATO forces in Kosovo. Shelton told a
group in California this month that he wouldn't
support Clark for president because of concerns
about his "integrity and character." But the
Shelton flap is only one of the high-profile
volleys that Clark has faced since he
launched his late-entry candidacy last week.
Conservatives have focused on Clark's connection
to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York,
who denied yesterday that she was setting up
Clark to run as her vice president and called
such rumors "an absurd feat of imagination." And the
press has focused on Clark's morphing position on
the congressional resolution to authorize war in
Iraq. After saying last week that he probably would
have supported the resolution with certain caveats,
Clark later said he never would have voted to
support the war. That wasn't a "rookie mistake,"
said Marc Landy, a political science
professor at Boston College. If Clark was
contemplating a run for months, Landy said, he
should have had a ready answer. Likewise, Landy
said, Clark should have considered that stalwart
Democrats might react badly to the fact that he has
voted for Republicans and presented a story of
personal conversion to explain his changing
politics. Some of Clark's rivals have already
focused on the issue: Yesterday, Senator John F.
Kerry told reporters that "while he was voting
for Richard Nixon and for Ronald Reagan,
I was fighting against their policies.”
…
OnPolitics writer Terry M.
Teal gives yet another view on the Clark Candidacy
in today’s Washington Post online. Headline: “The
General Takes the Field” … Excerpts: “As
speculation built about whether retired Army Gen.
Wesley K. Clark would enter the Democratic
presidential contest, the conventional wisdom
was that it might be too late to raise the kind of
money and build the kind of national network a
candidate needs to be competitive in an increasingly
front-loaded nominating process. But it has
become apparent that money and resources won't be
the only significant challenge he faces. Unlike
candidates who announced their intentions to
"explore" a presidential candidacy last winter or
spring, Clark doesn't have the luxury of being
ignored until he refines his message, because he is
entering the race when the public is beginning to
pay attention and media coverage is intense. That
has its good and bad points. The good: An
avalanche of media attention helped propel Clark to
the front of the Democratic pack. The bad: An
avalanche of media attention helped expose Clark's
apparent lack of preparation -- a vulnerability
that some of his opponents will seek to exploit at
tonight's debate in New York… Privately,
Clark's opponents are thrilled that his entry into
the race just happens to come right before tonight's
debate on the economy, sponsored by the
Wall Street Journal and CNBC. The
expectation from some of the camps is that
Clark's crash course in Economy 101 will do little
to shield his relative lack of experience on
domestic policy. Clark has already had a
well-documented stumble as he flip-flopped in the
debate over Iraq - an area that is supposed
to be his strength. "This debate is going to be
very important," said a Lieberman campaign
official. "Democratic primary voters list the
economy as the most important issue. It is one of
Bush's biggest vulnerabilities and Clark's weakest
point as well as Lieberman's strongest point."
Clark adviser Michael Frisby said his
candidate poses something that the others lack --
leadership. "The thing about Clark that
the other candidates will soon recognize is that he
is incredibly bright," Frisby said. "The parallels
to Clinton are tremendous in that they are both
brilliant. Clark is that kind of smart.”
… In light of last night’s
fireworks during the California Recall Debate,
CNN’s Political editor/InsidePolitics’ John
Mercurio asks the looming question, “If Clark
is Schwarzenegger, who is Huffington?”… Excerpts:
“LOS ANGELES,
California (CNN) --
So, who will play
the role of Arianna Huffington in today's
Democratic presidential debate?
With nothing to lose, plenty of "Crossfire" under
her belt and apparently lots of coffee in her veins,
Huffington led a feisty, finger-pointing,
four-candidate charge against Arnold
Schwarzenegger during last night's debate in
Sacramento. But while recall watchers chew over
Arnold's debate debut, '04 Dems in
New York are busy deciding how best to navigate
their first face-off with front-runner-for-now
Wesley Clark. Our first question: Will anyone
pull an Arianna? Just eight days into Clark's
campaign, his nine Democratic rivals already have
loads of ammunition: His rookie-style answers
on Iraq, which Dean is sure to address.
His acknowledgment that he voted for Richard
Nixon and Ronald Reagan and didn't consider himself
a Democrat until 1992, which John Kerry
finds disturbing. And his $100 billion economic and
homeland security proposal, which other candidates
say mimics parts of their own plans. Fortunately the
format allows for 30-second rebuttals, which
is just a fancy word for food fight. Or so we hope.
Publicly, Clark's rivals played it cool
yesterday. "We're doing the same thing we've always
done, [Clark] doesn't change anything,"
Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi told the Grind.
"It's probably more likely to be a non-event, like
most of them have been." "It's not useful to go out
there and bash other people," another Democratic
aide said. "What's that done for Joe Lieberman?
Not much." Dem aides also downplayed Clark's
polling surge. One aide theorized that the
general's lead is comprised mostly of "apolitical"
(read: fickle) voters who happened to catch TV
coverage of Clark's announcement last week between
live-shots of Isabel. "I'm not saying luck doesn't
count, but he was just lucky," one aide said. Said
another Clark rival: "The onus is on Clark. It isn't
on any of us to push or to test him. Clark needs to
measure up to the bar that he himself has set, or
that the media has set for him." The two-hour debate
will be held in the theater at Pace University's
Schimmel Center for the Arts in New York's financial
district. It has a start time of 4 p.m. EDT and will
be broadcast live on CNBC. It's to be rebroadcast in
its entirety on MSNBC at 9:00 p.m.” ..”Debate
details: NBC News' Brian Williams will
moderate. The three panelists are: Gloria Borger
of U.S. News & World Report, Ron Insana of CNBC and
Gerald Seib, Washington bureau chief of the Wall
Street Journal. The two-hour debate will consist
of four 22-minute sections and three commercial
breaks. Each section will focus on one general topic
related to the economy, which will be launched with
questions from the moderator, followed by questions
from the panel. Each candidate will have one minute
to respond. Directly following the debate, all nine
(oops, 10) candidates will head for the Sheraton
Towers Hotel for the Democratic National
Committee's second presidential dinner, a
big-ticket fund-raiser expected to generate $2
million from about 500 donors. Comedian-author Al
Franken, who headlines tonight's dinner, told
the Grind yesterday that he personally likes three
candidates: Dean, Kerry and Dick Gephardt. He said
he doesn't know enough yet
about Clark. "Except that
he's really smart, he's a Democrat, and he's
half-Jewish," something Franken says Clark told him
in Kosovo. Franken said he plans to open his remarks
with this zinger: "When the president during the
campaign said he was against nation building, I
didn't realize he meant our nation."
* ON THE BUSH BEAT:
* THE
CLINTON COMEDIES:
… Despite Hillary’s denials and rumors she’ll run
for Dem prez nomination in ’04, New York voters
weight in too – in poll – and six in 10 oppose try
for higher office. But the central question remains
unresolved: Does she care what NY voters think?
Excerpt from report by AP’s Marc Humbert: “A
growing number of New York voters, including almost
six in 10 Democrats, don't want Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton to run for president in 2004, a
statewide poll reported Wednesday. The poll from
Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion also
found that two-thirds of New York voters take the
former first lady at her word when she says she
won't seek the White House next year. New York
voters are about evenly split on whether they would
like to see Democrat Clinton run for the presidency
someday. In the latest Marist poll, 69 percent of
New York voters, including 57 percent of Democrats,
said they didn't want to see Clinton run in 2004.
In an April poll from the Poughkeepsie-based
pollster, 54 percent of New York voters said they
didn't want her to run for the White House next
year. During a recent visit to the New York State
Fair, Clinton said she was absolutely ruling
out a presidential run in 2004. While speculation
has continued since that she might make a late entry
into the race, 67 percent of New York voters in the
latest poll say they think she will stick to her
pledge to serve out her full six-year Senate term
that ends in 2006.”
… Inside The Beltway
gives it’s read on the new Bill Clinton
biography…Excerpts: “We've picked up Nigel
Hamilton's ("JFK: Restless Youth") new 785-page
comprehensive biography, "Bill Clinton: An
American Journey — Great Expectations," the
first of a two-volume series that reconstructs
the former president's background and career with
some much-welcomed psychological insight. Mr.
Clinton, the author explains, is the
quintessential baby boomer: blessed with a
near-genius IQ, yet beset by character flaws
that made his presidency a veritable soap opera
of high ideals, distressing incompetence,
model financial stewardship, and domestic
misbehavior. The Clinton White House, as
a result, fed the public an almost daily diet of
scandal and misfortune. "Poor Stephanopoulos,
a Republican turned idealistic Democrat," Mr.
Hamilton says of top Clinton aide George
Stephanopoulos, "a warrior who in his heart of
hearts would have been better suited to the
right-wing Republican crusade. ... "At the time,
however, he 'kept my anger inside to avoid
demoralizing the interns and volunteers.' " If you
purchase this thick, eye-opening volume, keep it on
the top shelf away from the children (not that Mr.
Clinton hasn't already taught kids enough in the
kinky category), for Mr. Hamilton tells all
unlike Hillary Rodham Clinton's current "tell-all."
As for the New York senator putting up with her
husband's shenanigans for so many years, the author
explains that her marriage to Mr. Clinton was
arranged from the start as a "political, not social,
event," in which she agreed to tolerate his
extramarital "relations." "It wasn't an ideal
setup from the point of view of a proud woman, but
it was frank, and it was pioneering, not only in
Arkansas, but in modern, compassionate America," Mr.
Hamilton writes. "She would not expect Bill to be
sexually faithful in their partnership, but she
would expect him to observe reasonable discretion —
to avoid rubbing her face in his sinful escapades."
An agreement, in other words? "On the basis of her
understanding with Bill," the author says, "she was
eventually convinced — or convinced herself — that
they could make it to the very top, in the fashion
of the French, as America's first modern 'power
couple.' "She therefore said yes."
… InsidePolitics/WashingtonTimes.com
“Censoring
Hillary”. The
Chinese publisher of former first lady Hillary
Rodham Clinton's autobiography altered the
original manuscript to expurgate all criticism of
the Beijing regime, her publisher says. The
New York Times quoted Mrs. Clinton as being "amazed
and outraged" to learn that her book, "Living
History," had been cleansed for its Chinese
readership. “They censored my book, just
like they tried to censor me," the Democratic
senator from New York told the newspaper. "The
Chinese edition of Hillary Clinton's 'Living
History,' published by Yilin Press, Nanjing, China,
includes changes to the original text in various
sections in the book," U.S. publisher Simon &
Schuster Inc. said in a statement. It said 10 pages
of the book had been changed, adding that the
unexpurgated version, in English as well as in
Chinese, were available on its Web site. *
NATIONAL POLITICS:
… InsidePolitics/WashingtonTimes.com
“Reno's rant” Excerpts: “Former U.S. Attorney
General Janet Reno on Tuesday accused the
Bush administration of abusing civil liberties
through the antiterrorist USA Patriot Act, the
Kansas City Star reports. Speaking to a crowd of
several hundred people at the University of Kansas'
Lied Center, Miss Reno said too many American
citizens are being held in military brigs as enemy
combatants without access to lawyers and without
criminal charges being filed. "This is not
something that should be tolerated," she said.
Miss Reno said she worries that America is
heading down the same shameful path that marked the
World War II era, when thousands of Japanese
Americans were forced into internment camps as a
precaution. *
WAR/TERRORISM: *
FEDERAL ISSUES:
…
“Congress, White House at Odds Over Saudi Arabia”
– headline on FOXNews.com. Excerpt from report by
FoxNews’s Peter Brownfield: “Lawmakers on Capitol
Hill accusing Saudi Arabia of being at the center of
terror funding say the White House is not
doing enough to address the threats from that
country. ‘The administration has more faith in
the Saudis than I do,’ Sen. Susan Collins,
R-Maine, told Fox News on Tuesday. ‘I think that the
Saudis have such a checkered history when it comes
to the funding of terrorist groups that I would
prefer our government take stronger action.’
Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Governmental
Affairs Committee, held a classified hearing Tuesday
to hear from Treasury, State and FBI officials about
cooperation in efforts to track terror financing.
The Bush administration has maintained that the
longstanding friendship between the United States
and Saudi Arabia continues unwithered, based on
mutual security and oil interests. ‘I’ve got an
absolute sense [from the Saudis] that there are no
holds barred in going after the money and the
terrorists,’ Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told
reporters after a meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia,
last week with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. The
Saudis have been ‘very good partners in helping us
go after the people in the Al Qaeda organization,’
Vice President Dick Cheney said in a televised
interview last week. That sense of partnership
has been quite different on Capitol Hill. Sen.
Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., has emerged as a leading
critic of Saudi Arabia and has urged the Bush
administration to get tough with the country.
Concerns have also come from Republican senators,
including Jon Kyl of Arizona and Arlen Specter of
Pennsylvania. ‘This administration has been somewhat
insulating its foreign policy from popular concerns,
but Congress is much more susceptible to public
pressure,’ CATO Institute senior fellow Doug Bandow
said, explaining the difference in attitudes toward
the Saudis. During a Senate Judiciary Committee
hearing earlier this month, Schumer railed against
Saudi Arabia for funding radical Wahhabi Islamic
groups throughout the Middle East and in Pakistan. Wahhabi
is Saudi Arabia's state religion. Wahhabi charities
have been accused of contributing to both Al Qaeda
and the Palestinian terror network Hamas. ‘The
Saudis continue aggressively to export this
intolerant and violent form of Islam Wahhabism to
Muslims across the globe,’ Kyl added during that
same hearing.”
…
The
Christian Science Monitor
reports that there is a shift against drug benefits
in
Medicare.
Headline: “With
a tightening budget and conservative backlash,
healthcare reform appears unlikely, or at least
delayed.” Excerpts from the report, written by Peter
Grier: “WASHINGTON
–
The push to add a
prescription-drug benefit to
Medicare could be running into trouble.
New obstacles
- including the exploding federal deficit and a
revolt on the issue by conservatives in the House
- may be making it less likely that omnibus
Medicare reform will clear Congress this year.
As is so often the case with complicated bills,
delay may equal denial. If consideration of Medi-care
is pushed into the 2004 legislative season,
the pressures of presidential politics might
stall passage for the foreseeable future.
"There is a real conservative backlash to the
Medicare bill," says Stephen Moore,
president of the Club for Growth, a group
dedicated to tax cuts and lower government spending.
There are many reasons why Medicare reform could
still pass this year, of course. President Bush
and Democratic leaders have said they want to
provide some sort of drug benefit for America's
retirees. The House and Senate have
approved their own versions of Medicare
legislation, and a conference committee charged with
unifying the bills has been at work for some months.
The current logjam impeding progress could clear
quickly, particularly if the White House gets
involved.
Budget woes, price controls:
Recently 13 conservative
representatives signed a letter to Speaker of the
House Dennis Hastert (R) of Illinois
threatening to vote against final passage
of the Medicare bill unless it includes
provisions aimed at preventing drug-program costs
from rising.
Prescription benefits:
Drug reimportation is
another potential roadblock. Representatives from
both sides of the aisle have begun pressing for any
final bill to include a provision allowing consumers
to buy cheaper drugs in Canada. Recently 142
House Democrats signed a letter saying they would be
"unlikely to support a Medicare drug benefit" that
does not include such a provision. The drug benefit
in question is complicated, with a daunting array of
deductibles and spending caps to hold down costs.
Some retirees worry that passage of a federal
program might cause former employers to drop drug
coverage for former employees. But the powerful
AARP strongly backs inclusion of prescription drugs
in Medicare reform, as do many large
corporations. The AARP is pushing its members to
pressure lawmakers for action - now. The final
fate of Medicare reform may depend on pressure from
the White House. With Republicans in
control of the House, Senate, and White House,
passage of a bill could give the GOP electoral
bragging rights - as failure would provide an
easy target for Democrats next fall. "The odds
are still that Bush will prevail" on the issue,
says Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth.
* TODAY’S IOWA LINKS:
-- Des Moines Register:
www.DesMoinesRegister.com
-- Quad-City Times:
www.QCTimes.com
-- Radio Iowa/Learfield Communications:
www.radioiowa.com
-- Sioux City Journal:
www.siouxcityjournal.com
-- WHO Radio (AM1040), Des Moines:
www.whoradio.com
-- OpinionJournal.com (Wall Street Journal):
www.opinionjournal.com
-- New York Times:
www.nytimes.com
-- Washington Post:
www.washingtonpost.com
-- Omaha World-Herald:
www.omaha.com
-- WMT Radio (AM600), Cedar Rapids:
www.wmtradio.com
-- FOXNews.com (Fox News Channel):
www.foxnews.com
-- WHO-TV, Des Moines:
www.whotv.com
-- Chicago Tribune:
www.chicagotribune.com
-- Various morning and midday newscasts from around
IA.
click here
Paid
for by the Iowa Presidential Watch PAC
P.O.
Box 171, Webster City, IA 50595
privacy
/ agreement
/
/ homepage
/
search engine |
