Democrats Abroad New Zealand
1.31.2007
Biden Says Experience Will Fuel White House Run (Reuters.com)
Tue Jan 30, 2007 4:47pm ET135
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden said on Tuesday his foreign policy ideas and experience would be the ideal assets in a crowded and star-studded 2008 White House race that is likely to focus on ways to end the Iraq war.
The six-term Delaware senator, who will announce his presidential candidacy on Wednesday, said he was not worried about competing for money or support against high-profile Democratic contenders like Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois.
"It's not so much whether I can compete with their money, but whether they can compete with my ideas and my experience," Biden said in a Reuters interview, adding the rush of publicity around the first campaign trips by Obama and Clinton would fade.
"That was a gigantic response, but now what happens? You have to go town to town and sell yourself," he said. "I'm confident I can compete on any level with any one of them."
The new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who lost a 1988 presidential bid, has been a prominent congressional voice on Iraq, terrorism and foreign policy for decades.
Biden sponsored the nonbinding resolution approved by his Senate committee last week opposing Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.
He said he had never seen Americans as "sober and serious" about the future as they are now.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden said on Tuesday his foreign policy ideas and experience would be the ideal assets in a crowded and star-studded 2008 White House race that is likely to focus on ways to end the Iraq war.
The six-term Delaware senator, who will announce his presidential candidacy on Wednesday, said he was not worried about competing for money or support against high-profile Democratic contenders like Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois.
"It's not so much whether I can compete with their money, but whether they can compete with my ideas and my experience," Biden said in a Reuters interview, adding the rush of publicity around the first campaign trips by Obama and Clinton would fade.
"That was a gigantic response, but now what happens? You have to go town to town and sell yourself," he said. "I'm confident I can compete on any level with any one of them."
The new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who lost a 1988 presidential bid, has been a prominent congressional voice on Iraq, terrorism and foreign policy for decades.
Biden sponsored the nonbinding resolution approved by his Senate committee last week opposing Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.
He said he had never seen Americans as "sober and serious" about the future as they are now.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Biden, Reuters
¶ 22:01 0 comments
Bush Pledges Balanced Budget (Reuters.com)
Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:20pm ET146
By Caren Bohan
PEORIA, Illinois (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Tuesday he plans to submit a budget proposal for fiscal 2008 next week that would help the government balance its budget by 2012 while still keeping taxes low.
"I'm going to submit a budget for Congress to look at that shows how we can balance the budget in five years and keep your taxes low," he said in a speech to workers of heavy equipment maker Caterpillar.
It was the first of two speeches Bush is giving on the U.S. economy after his State of the Union address a week ago. The second is scheduled for Wednesday in New York.
The unveiling of Bush's fiscal 2008 budget on Monday will kick off months of wrangling over spending priorities, and some analysts are bracing for the most rancorous debate since a 1996 standoff that led to a temporary shutdown of the government.
The budget deficit was $248 billion in fiscal 2006, down from a record of $413 billion in 2004.
Democrats, now in control of Congress, are concerned that the cost of the Iraq war and Bush's vow to extend his tax cuts will worsen the budget picture.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
By Caren Bohan
PEORIA, Illinois (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Tuesday he plans to submit a budget proposal for fiscal 2008 next week that would help the government balance its budget by 2012 while still keeping taxes low.
"I'm going to submit a budget for Congress to look at that shows how we can balance the budget in five years and keep your taxes low," he said in a speech to workers of heavy equipment maker Caterpillar.
It was the first of two speeches Bush is giving on the U.S. economy after his State of the Union address a week ago. The second is scheduled for Wednesday in New York.
The unveiling of Bush's fiscal 2008 budget on Monday will kick off months of wrangling over spending priorities, and some analysts are bracing for the most rancorous debate since a 1996 standoff that led to a temporary shutdown of the government.
The budget deficit was $248 billion in fiscal 2006, down from a record of $413 billion in 2004.
Democrats, now in control of Congress, are concerned that the cost of the Iraq war and Bush's vow to extend his tax cuts will worsen the budget picture.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
Labels: Budget, Bush, Congress, Reuters
¶ 21:54 0 comments
Chairman: Bush Officials Misled Public on Global Warming (CNN.com)
POSTED: 2:28 p.m. EST, January 30, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic chairman of a House panel examining the government's response to climate change said Tuesday there is evidence that senior Bush administration officials sought repeatedly "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, said he and the top Republican on his oversight committee, Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, have sought documents from the administration on climate policy, but repeatedly been rebuffed.
"The committee isn't trying to obtain state secrets or documents that could affect our immediate national security," said Waxman, opening the hearing. "We are simply seeking answers to whether the White House's political staff is inappropriately censoring impartial government scientists."
"We know that the White House possesses documents that contain evidence of an attempt by senior administration officials to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming and minimize the potential danger," Waxman said.
Administration officials were not scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In the past the White House has said it has only sought to inject balance into reports on climate change. Present Bush has acknowledged concerns about global warming, but strongly opposes mandatory caps of greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that approach would be too costly.
Waxman said his committee had not received documents it requested from the White House and other agencies, and that a handful of papers received on the eve of the hearing "add nothing to our inquiry."
Two private advocacy groups, meanwhile, presented to the panel a survey of government climate scientists showing that many of them say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic chairman of a House panel examining the government's response to climate change said Tuesday there is evidence that senior Bush administration officials sought repeatedly "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, said he and the top Republican on his oversight committee, Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, have sought documents from the administration on climate policy, but repeatedly been rebuffed.
"The committee isn't trying to obtain state secrets or documents that could affect our immediate national security," said Waxman, opening the hearing. "We are simply seeking answers to whether the White House's political staff is inappropriately censoring impartial government scientists."
"We know that the White House possesses documents that contain evidence of an attempt by senior administration officials to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming and minimize the potential danger," Waxman said.
Administration officials were not scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In the past the White House has said it has only sought to inject balance into reports on climate change. Present Bush has acknowledged concerns about global warming, but strongly opposes mandatory caps of greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that approach would be too costly.
Waxman said his committee had not received documents it requested from the White House and other agencies, and that a handful of papers received on the eve of the hearing "add nothing to our inquiry."
Two private advocacy groups, meanwhile, presented to the panel a survey of government climate scientists showing that many of them say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
Labels: Bush, Climate Change, CNN, Congress
¶ 21:42 0 comments
Obama Calls for U.S. Troops to Leave Iraq by March 2008 (Stuff.co.nz)
Reuters | Wednesday, 31 January 2007
WASHINGTON: Likely presidential contender Senator Barack Obama called today for the removal of all US combat forces from Iraq by March 2008, in answer to what he called President George W Bush's "failed policy of escalation".
"Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war," Obama said in a statement.
"That's why I have introduced a plan to not only stop the escalation of this war, but begin a phased redeployment that can pressure the Iraqis to finally reach a political settlement and reduce the violence," said the Illinois Democrat, a leading contender for his party's presidential nomination in 2008.
Obama said his plan focuses on reaching a political solution in Iraq, protecting US interests in the region, and bringing the war to an end.
(More ... Stuff > News > World) ¶ 21:23 0 comments
WASHINGTON: Likely presidential contender Senator Barack Obama called today for the removal of all US combat forces from Iraq by March 2008, in answer to what he called President George W Bush's "failed policy of escalation".
"Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war," Obama said in a statement.
"That's why I have introduced a plan to not only stop the escalation of this war, but begin a phased redeployment that can pressure the Iraqis to finally reach a political settlement and reduce the violence," said the Illinois Democrat, a leading contender for his party's presidential nomination in 2008.
Obama said his plan focuses on reaching a political solution in Iraq, protecting US interests in the region, and bringing the war to an end.
(More ... Stuff > News > World) ¶ 21:23 0 comments
1.30.2007
Obama Blasts Bush Administration on Katrina (ChicagoTribune.com)
By Mike Dorning
Tribune national correspondent
Published January 29, 2007, 8:48 PM CST
NEW ORLEANS -- Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama blasted the Bush administration Monday for the slow pace of Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, saying reconstruction no longer seems to be a White House priority.
"There is not a sense of urgency in this administration to get this done," said the senator from Illinois. "You get a sense that will has been lacking in the last several months."
Obama, the Senate's only African-American member, was in New Orleans for a field hearing on Gulf Coast rebuilding conducted by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
In the days after Katrina, the devastation of New Orleans and the botched federal response turned into a dramatic international emblem for charges of incompetence in the administration and of indifference to the plight of poor people, particularly blacks and other racial minorities. The flooding and tardy rescue efforts had the greatest impact on low-income black residents, many of whom did not have personal transportation or financial resources to evacuate easily on their own.
The broken homes and vacant streets of the city's flood-damaged neighborhoods remain a potent political symbol. Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards kicked off his campaign in December outside a damaged home in one hard-hit neighborhood.
After Monday's field hearing, the Senate committee took a bus tour of the city's Lower 9th Ward, a low-income black neighborhood where many ruined homes sit empty and bear the painted X-marks used in the chaotic weeks following the hurricane to show which buildings had been searched for survivors.
Testifying to the committee, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin said he still doesn't see "the will to really fix" his city and suggested that race was a factor.
"I think it's more class than anything, but there's racial issues associated with it also," said Nagin, who is black.
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Local News)
Tribune national correspondent
Published January 29, 2007, 8:48 PM CST
NEW ORLEANS -- Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama blasted the Bush administration Monday for the slow pace of Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts, saying reconstruction no longer seems to be a White House priority.
"There is not a sense of urgency in this administration to get this done," said the senator from Illinois. "You get a sense that will has been lacking in the last several months."
Obama, the Senate's only African-American member, was in New Orleans for a field hearing on Gulf Coast rebuilding conducted by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
In the days after Katrina, the devastation of New Orleans and the botched federal response turned into a dramatic international emblem for charges of incompetence in the administration and of indifference to the plight of poor people, particularly blacks and other racial minorities. The flooding and tardy rescue efforts had the greatest impact on low-income black residents, many of whom did not have personal transportation or financial resources to evacuate easily on their own.
The broken homes and vacant streets of the city's flood-damaged neighborhoods remain a potent political symbol. Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards kicked off his campaign in December outside a damaged home in one hard-hit neighborhood.
After Monday's field hearing, the Senate committee took a bus tour of the city's Lower 9th Ward, a low-income black neighborhood where many ruined homes sit empty and bear the painted X-marks used in the chaotic weeks following the hurricane to show which buildings had been searched for survivors.
Testifying to the committee, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin said he still doesn't see "the will to really fix" his city and suggested that race was a factor.
"I think it's more class than anything, but there's racial issues associated with it also," said Nagin, who is black.
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Local News)
Labels: Chicago Tribune, Katrina, Obama
¶ 20:25 0 comments
Bush Dirfective Increases Sway on Regulations (NYTimes.com)
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 30, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 — President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy.
In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities.
This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.
The White House said the executive order was not meant to rein in any one agency. But business executives and consumer advocates said the administration was particularly concerned about rules and guidance issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
In an interview on Monday, Jeffrey A. Rosen, general counsel at the White House Office of Management and Budget, said, “This is a classic good-government measure that will make federal agencies more open and accountable.”
Business groups welcomed the executive order, saying it had the potential to reduce what they saw as the burden of federal regulations. This burden is of great concern to many groups, including small businesses, that have given strong political and financial backing to Mr. Bush.
Consumer, labor and environmental groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control to the White House and would hinder agencies’ efforts to protect the public.
Typically, agencies issue regulations under authority granted to them in laws enacted by Congress. In many cases, the statute does not say precisely what agencies should do, giving them considerable latitude in interpreting the law and developing regulations.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Published: January 30, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 — President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy.
In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities.
This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.
The White House said the executive order was not meant to rein in any one agency. But business executives and consumer advocates said the administration was particularly concerned about rules and guidance issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
In an interview on Monday, Jeffrey A. Rosen, general counsel at the White House Office of Management and Budget, said, “This is a classic good-government measure that will make federal agencies more open and accountable.”
Business groups welcomed the executive order, saying it had the potential to reduce what they saw as the burden of federal regulations. This burden is of great concern to many groups, including small businesses, that have given strong political and financial backing to Mr. Bush.
Consumer, labor and environmental groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control to the White House and would hinder agencies’ efforts to protect the public.
Typically, agencies issue regulations under authority granted to them in laws enacted by Congress. In many cases, the statute does not say precisely what agencies should do, giving them considerable latitude in interpreting the law and developing regulations.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Labels: Bush, Congress, New York Times
¶ 20:12 0 comments
Women Feeling Freer to Suggest ' Vite for Mom' (NYTimes.com)
POLITICAL MEMO
By ROBIN TONER
Published: January 29, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 28 — Some women were struck by the politics of maternity practiced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in recent weeks, the imagery and stagecraft that highlighted their roles as mothers and/or grandmothers.
For some, the issues were complicated: Is this a throwback, or a step forward? Is it politically smart?
For a long time women seeking high office, particularly executive office, were advised to play down their softer, domestic side, and play up their strength and qualifications. Focus groups often found voters questioning whether women were strong enough, tough enough, to lead.
Emily’s List, the Democratic women’s group, warned in an internal memo in 1988 that women must “fight throughout their campaigns to establish their qualifications, power, toughness and capacity to win.”
Breakthrough candidates like Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who campaigned unsuccessfully for governor under the slogan “tough and caring” in 1990, worked hard to ease those doubts.
Some women embraced their outsider status. Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, campaigned in 1992 as “just a mom in tennis shoes,” capitalizing on a dismissive comment once directed her way by a male politician. But the reservations of many voters were real 15 or 20 years ago.
Today, many political strategists say women no longer have to be so defensive. Voters have grown more accustomed to women in powerful positions. And women like Ms. Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton, whatever other problems they may have, have been on the public scene long enough and are familiar enough players in the architecture of power that they no longer have to prove their strength day in and day out.
In fact, strong leadership was seen as one of Mrs. Clinton’s core attributes in a CBS News Poll, conducted Jan. 18-21. Sixty-four percent of the men surveyed, and 75 percent of the women, said Mrs. Clinton had strong qualities of leadership.
“It’s a whole different world,” said Bill Carrick, a Democratic strategist and a longtime Feinstein adviser. And the stereotypes are weakening as younger generations come along, Mr. Carrick added.
(More ... New York Times > Politics)
By ROBIN TONER
Published: January 29, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 28 — Some women were struck by the politics of maternity practiced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in recent weeks, the imagery and stagecraft that highlighted their roles as mothers and/or grandmothers.
For some, the issues were complicated: Is this a throwback, or a step forward? Is it politically smart?
For a long time women seeking high office, particularly executive office, were advised to play down their softer, domestic side, and play up their strength and qualifications. Focus groups often found voters questioning whether women were strong enough, tough enough, to lead.
Emily’s List, the Democratic women’s group, warned in an internal memo in 1988 that women must “fight throughout their campaigns to establish their qualifications, power, toughness and capacity to win.”
Breakthrough candidates like Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who campaigned unsuccessfully for governor under the slogan “tough and caring” in 1990, worked hard to ease those doubts.
Some women embraced their outsider status. Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, campaigned in 1992 as “just a mom in tennis shoes,” capitalizing on a dismissive comment once directed her way by a male politician. But the reservations of many voters were real 15 or 20 years ago.
Today, many political strategists say women no longer have to be so defensive. Voters have grown more accustomed to women in powerful positions. And women like Ms. Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton, whatever other problems they may have, have been on the public scene long enough and are familiar enough players in the architecture of power that they no longer have to prove their strength day in and day out.
In fact, strong leadership was seen as one of Mrs. Clinton’s core attributes in a CBS News Poll, conducted Jan. 18-21. Sixty-four percent of the men surveyed, and 75 percent of the women, said Mrs. Clinton had strong qualities of leadership.
“It’s a whole different world,” said Bill Carrick, a Democratic strategist and a longtime Feinstein adviser. And the stereotypes are weakening as younger generations come along, Mr. Carrick added.
(More ... New York Times > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, New York Times, Women
¶ 08:12 0 comments
Congress Moving on Climate Change (SFGate.com)
Industry, GOP, Dems try to curb greenhouse gas risk
Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Monday, January 29, 2007
01-29) 04:00 PST Washington -- The U.S. Senate, showing a new enthusiasm for the fight against global warming, begins hearings this week on competing proposals by lawmakers to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Last year, the Republican-led Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held regular hearings on whether global warming was a hoax. But Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who now chairs the panel, is staging a rare open-microphone hearing Tuesday, where senators will offer their ideas for tackling climate change.
Calls for action will probably grow when the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change issues a report Friday in Paris that is expected to show increased certainty among scientists that human use of fossil fuels is causing warming. The report also includes projections about the damage that various regions could suffer from rising sea levels, heat waves and droughts.
The Democratic takeover of Congress, combined with growing calls from industry, religious leaders and the public for action, has dramatically improved the chances for legislation that could set limits on carbon dioxide emissions, raise fuel economy standards, and require greater energy efficiency for buildings.
"There is just a coming together of so many different groups and so many individuals in favor of moving forward to combat global warming," Boxer said in an interview last week. "It's very, very encouraging."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco is putting pressure on House Democrats to act fast by creating a new select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming and setting an ambitious deadline of passing climate change legislation by July 4.
"Global warming is an increasing threat to our world, with implications for our health, food supply, and the survival of many species and perhaps entire ecosystems," Pelosi said in a speech last week to the U.S. Conference of Mayors. "We cannot afford to wait."
The groundswell for action has been so great that even President Bush is recalibrating his stance on climate change.
(More ... San Francisco Chronicle > News)
Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Monday, January 29, 2007
01-29) 04:00 PST Washington -- The U.S. Senate, showing a new enthusiasm for the fight against global warming, begins hearings this week on competing proposals by lawmakers to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
Last year, the Republican-led Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held regular hearings on whether global warming was a hoax. But Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who now chairs the panel, is staging a rare open-microphone hearing Tuesday, where senators will offer their ideas for tackling climate change.
Calls for action will probably grow when the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change issues a report Friday in Paris that is expected to show increased certainty among scientists that human use of fossil fuels is causing warming. The report also includes projections about the damage that various regions could suffer from rising sea levels, heat waves and droughts.
The Democratic takeover of Congress, combined with growing calls from industry, religious leaders and the public for action, has dramatically improved the chances for legislation that could set limits on carbon dioxide emissions, raise fuel economy standards, and require greater energy efficiency for buildings.
"There is just a coming together of so many different groups and so many individuals in favor of moving forward to combat global warming," Boxer said in an interview last week. "It's very, very encouraging."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco is putting pressure on House Democrats to act fast by creating a new select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming and setting an ambitious deadline of passing climate change legislation by July 4.
"Global warming is an increasing threat to our world, with implications for our health, food supply, and the survival of many species and perhaps entire ecosystems," Pelosi said in a speech last week to the U.S. Conference of Mayors. "We cannot afford to wait."
The groundswell for action has been so great that even President Bush is recalibrating his stance on climate change.
(More ... San Francisco Chronicle > News)
Labels: Climate Change, Congress, San Francisco Chronicle
¶ 08:07 0 comments
1.29.2007
Mized Review for Clinton in Iowa (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 29, 2007; Page A01
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa, Jan. 28 -- Lynda Waddington met Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton twice this weekend as the Democratic senator from New York made her initial campaign visit to the state with the nation's first presidential caucuses. Clinton, she said, is nothing like the politician she sees portrayed in the press.
"The media in particular has a bad habit of taking our candidates and giving them back to us in a caricature," said Waddington, an Iowa Democratic Party official and activist. "Al Gore was a bumbling elitist. With Hillary, they have her painted as a cold fish. That's absolutely what you do not get in person. She's very warm and very intelligent."
Kay Hale met Clinton for the first time at a house party in Cedar Rapids on Saturday night. "I just never really had a true opinion of her," said Hale, who calls herself a "granny nanny" and drives a school bus. "I didn't hate her. A lot of people hate her or they like her, and I am not that way. I found her to be very warm."
Based on those reactions, Clinton and her campaign advisers may justifiably conclude that she made a positive first impression on Iowa Democratic Party activists. But a 90-minute conversation with 14 Iowa Democrats here Sunday afternoon tells a more complete and not-so-encouraging story of her candidacy in its early stages.
Widely admired and seen as strong and intelligent, Clinton nonetheless engenders substantial doubts among people who, by virtue of Iowa's place at the front of the nominating calendar, could play an outsized role in selecting the next Democratic presidential nominee.
"Competent and capable, but she's my fourth choice," said Dale Hedgecoth, a carpenter at a local high school.
"Strong, but not it," added Dona Howe, a first-grade teacher.
The 14 party activists were invited by The Washington Post to come together to talk about the presidential race. All are currently uncommitted. Their views are in no way a scientific sample, but as voters who pay especially close attention to presidential politics, they offer clues to the future in their impressions.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 29, 2007; Page A01
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa, Jan. 28 -- Lynda Waddington met Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton twice this weekend as the Democratic senator from New York made her initial campaign visit to the state with the nation's first presidential caucuses. Clinton, she said, is nothing like the politician she sees portrayed in the press.
"The media in particular has a bad habit of taking our candidates and giving them back to us in a caricature," said Waddington, an Iowa Democratic Party official and activist. "Al Gore was a bumbling elitist. With Hillary, they have her painted as a cold fish. That's absolutely what you do not get in person. She's very warm and very intelligent."
Kay Hale met Clinton for the first time at a house party in Cedar Rapids on Saturday night. "I just never really had a true opinion of her," said Hale, who calls herself a "granny nanny" and drives a school bus. "I didn't hate her. A lot of people hate her or they like her, and I am not that way. I found her to be very warm."
Based on those reactions, Clinton and her campaign advisers may justifiably conclude that she made a positive first impression on Iowa Democratic Party activists. But a 90-minute conversation with 14 Iowa Democrats here Sunday afternoon tells a more complete and not-so-encouraging story of her candidacy in its early stages.
Widely admired and seen as strong and intelligent, Clinton nonetheless engenders substantial doubts among people who, by virtue of Iowa's place at the front of the nominating calendar, could play an outsized role in selecting the next Democratic presidential nominee.
"Competent and capable, but she's my fourth choice," said Dale Hedgecoth, a carpenter at a local high school.
"Strong, but not it," added Dona Howe, a first-grade teacher.
The 14 party activists were invited by The Washington Post to come together to talk about the presidential race. All are currently uncommitted. Their views are in no way a scientific sample, but as voters who pay especially close attention to presidential politics, they offer clues to the future in their impressions.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Clinton, Washington Post
¶ 21:26 0 comments
Two Election Workers Convicted (Chroniclet.com)
Rigged 2004 presidential recount; third worker acquitted
M.R. Kropko
The Associated Press
CLEVELAND — Two election workers in the state’s most populous county were convicted Wednesday of illegally rigging the 2004 presidential election recount so they could avoid a more thorough review of the votes.
A third employee who had been charged was acquitted on all counts.
Jacqueline Maiden, the elections’ coordinator who was the board’s third-highest ranking employee when she was indicted last March, and ballot manager Kathleen Dreamer each were convicted of a felony count of negligent misconduct of an elections employee.
Maiden and Dreamer also were convicted of one misdemeanor count each of failure of elections employees to perform their duty. Both were acquitted of five other charges.
Rosie Grier, assistant manager of the Cuyahoga County Elections Board’s ballot department, was acquitted of all seven counts of various election misconduct or interference charges.
The felony conviction carries a possible sentence of six to 18 months.
There was a gasp in the courtroom gallery, which included some relatives and friends of the defendants, when a “not guilty” verdict was announced on the first charge. The courtroom went silent when a “guilty” verdict was returned.
The defendants sat near each other silently as the 21 verdicts were read.
Ohio gave Bush the electoral votes he needed to defeat Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the close election and hold on to the White House in 2004.
(More ... The (Elyria, Ohio) Chronicle Telegram > News)
M.R. Kropko
The Associated Press
CLEVELAND — Two election workers in the state’s most populous county were convicted Wednesday of illegally rigging the 2004 presidential election recount so they could avoid a more thorough review of the votes.
A third employee who had been charged was acquitted on all counts.
Jacqueline Maiden, the elections’ coordinator who was the board’s third-highest ranking employee when she was indicted last March, and ballot manager Kathleen Dreamer each were convicted of a felony count of negligent misconduct of an elections employee.
Maiden and Dreamer also were convicted of one misdemeanor count each of failure of elections employees to perform their duty. Both were acquitted of five other charges.
Rosie Grier, assistant manager of the Cuyahoga County Elections Board’s ballot department, was acquitted of all seven counts of various election misconduct or interference charges.
The felony conviction carries a possible sentence of six to 18 months.
There was a gasp in the courtroom gallery, which included some relatives and friends of the defendants, when a “not guilty” verdict was announced on the first charge. The courtroom went silent when a “guilty” verdict was returned.
The defendants sat near each other silently as the 21 verdicts were read.
Ohio gave Bush the electoral votes he needed to defeat Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the close election and hold on to the White House in 2004.
(More ... The (Elyria, Ohio) Chronicle Telegram > News)
Labels: 2004 election, Voting Irregularities
¶ 19:19 1 comments
1.28.2007
The New Gold Rush: How Farmers Are Set to Fuel America's Future (Guardian.co.uk)
Rush to grow corn for ethanol - but is it the best solution for environment?
Ed Pilkington in Churdan, Iowa
Friday January 26, 2007
The Guardian
George Naylor's farm occupies 470 acres of some of the richest agricultural land in the world, alluvial loam deposited by the Wisconsin glacier 10,000 years ago. At this time of year it is a great white void. For miles around there is nothing but snow broken only by the occasional copse or lonely farmstead.
His grandfather, an English migrant from Derbyshire, bought the farm in 1918. Over the years the dictates of the market pushed farmers towards mass production of fewer crops. When George inherited the land in 1976 he had plans for an organic oats farm, but soon found the sums didn't work out.
So, like all his neighbours, he tore down the fences to make way for tractors and harvesting equipment. He doubled his holding to 470 acres by renting a neighbour's land to add economies of scale. Many farmsteads were razed as their owners drifted into the towns and all that was left was row upon row of corn and soya bean. And that's how George's farm came to look as it does today: a flat mattress of green and gold in summer, a great white void in winter.
Recently George has heard his neighbours say they are taking the final step to turn this heartland of the Mid-West into the Cornbelt of America, ending the rotation of corn and soya bean that has become the norm over the past 30 years.
What is motivating George's neighbours is the rising demand for ethanol, a biofuel that is mixed with petrol to bring down prices at the pump and, though not without controversy, to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
Even before this week, this was a big growth area. Production of ethanol doubled between 2001 and 2005. The chief economist of the US department of agriculture has called it "the most stunning development in agricultural markets today".
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > USA) ¶ 09:53 0 comments
Ed Pilkington in Churdan, Iowa
Friday January 26, 2007
The Guardian
George Naylor's farm occupies 470 acres of some of the richest agricultural land in the world, alluvial loam deposited by the Wisconsin glacier 10,000 years ago. At this time of year it is a great white void. For miles around there is nothing but snow broken only by the occasional copse or lonely farmstead.
His grandfather, an English migrant from Derbyshire, bought the farm in 1918. Over the years the dictates of the market pushed farmers towards mass production of fewer crops. When George inherited the land in 1976 he had plans for an organic oats farm, but soon found the sums didn't work out.
So, like all his neighbours, he tore down the fences to make way for tractors and harvesting equipment. He doubled his holding to 470 acres by renting a neighbour's land to add economies of scale. Many farmsteads were razed as their owners drifted into the towns and all that was left was row upon row of corn and soya bean. And that's how George's farm came to look as it does today: a flat mattress of green and gold in summer, a great white void in winter.
Recently George has heard his neighbours say they are taking the final step to turn this heartland of the Mid-West into the Cornbelt of America, ending the rotation of corn and soya bean that has become the norm over the past 30 years.
What is motivating George's neighbours is the rising demand for ethanol, a biofuel that is mixed with petrol to bring down prices at the pump and, though not without controversy, to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming.
Even before this week, this was a big growth area. Production of ethanol doubled between 2001 and 2005. The chief economist of the US department of agriculture has called it "the most stunning development in agricultural markets today".
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > USA) ¶ 09:53 0 comments
1.27.2007
Obama Calls for Universal Health Care Within Six Years (CNN.com)
POSTED: 12:57 p.m. EST, January 25, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Every American should have health care coverage within six years, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said Thursday as he set an ambitious goal soon after jumping into the 2008 presidential race.
"The time has come for universal health care in America," Obama said at a conference of Families USA, a health care advocacy group.
"I am absolutely determined that by the end of the first term of the next president, we should have universal health care in this country," the Illinois senator said.
Obama was previewing what is shaping up to be a theme of the 2008 Democratic primary. His chief rivals, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards, also are strong proponents of universal health care and have promised to offer their plans.
Obama said while plans are offered in every campaign season with "much fanfare and promise," they collapse under the weight of Washington politics, leaving citizens to struggle with the skyrocketing costs.
He said it's wrong that 46 million in this country are uninsured when the country spends more than any one else on health care. He said Americans pay $15 billion in taxes to help care for the uninsured.
"We can't afford another disappointing charade in 2008, 2009 and 2010," Obama said. "It's not only tiresome, it's wrong."
Obama's call was an echo of a speech he made last April when he said Democrats "need to cling to the core values that make us Democrats, the belief in universal health care, the belief in universal education, and then we should be agnostic in terms of how to achieve those values."
His argument Thursday not only will be considered through the prism of the presidential campaign, but weighed against rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's ill-fated plan to overhaul the health care insurance system when she was first lady.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Every American should have health care coverage within six years, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said Thursday as he set an ambitious goal soon after jumping into the 2008 presidential race.
"The time has come for universal health care in America," Obama said at a conference of Families USA, a health care advocacy group.
"I am absolutely determined that by the end of the first term of the next president, we should have universal health care in this country," the Illinois senator said.
Obama was previewing what is shaping up to be a theme of the 2008 Democratic primary. His chief rivals, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards, also are strong proponents of universal health care and have promised to offer their plans.
Obama said while plans are offered in every campaign season with "much fanfare and promise," they collapse under the weight of Washington politics, leaving citizens to struggle with the skyrocketing costs.
He said it's wrong that 46 million in this country are uninsured when the country spends more than any one else on health care. He said Americans pay $15 billion in taxes to help care for the uninsured.
"We can't afford another disappointing charade in 2008, 2009 and 2010," Obama said. "It's not only tiresome, it's wrong."
Obama's call was an echo of a speech he made last April when he said Democrats "need to cling to the core values that make us Democrats, the belief in universal health care, the belief in universal education, and then we should be agnostic in terms of how to achieve those values."
His argument Thursday not only will be considered through the prism of the presidential campaign, but weighed against rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's ill-fated plan to overhaul the health care insurance system when she was first lady.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, CNN, Health Care, Obama
¶ 22:19 0 comments
Obama's Harvard Days Marked by Bridge-building (LATimes.com)
By Richard A. Serrano and David G. Savage, Times Staff Writers
7:45 PM PST, January 26, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama's entry into politics came on a winter morning at the white-columned Harvard Law Review building when, about 2 a.m., a deeply divided editorial staff chose him as the first African American to lead the prestigious publication.
It was no small accomplishment. Obama, who at nearly 30 was older and more world-wise than most of his classmates, had to navigate among sharply drawn factions of conservatives and liberals to beat 18 other candidates for the job.
Today, as he weighs a bid for the White House, Obama has provoked questions about whether he has the experience to build a winning coalition of voters. But at Harvard Law he showed that — on a much smaller scale — he had the savvy to maneuver through turbulent political waters.
"The Harvard Law Review was a place of petty and vicious internal politics," said Brad Berenson, an editorial board member with Obama and, more recently, an associate White House counsel to President Bush.
"Compared to Washington and the White House and the Supreme Court, the Harvard Law Review was much more politically vicious," Berenson said. "The conservatives threw their support to Obama because he could bridge the gap between both camps and retain the trust and confidence of both."
Whether Obama can reprise his role as political bridge-builder remains to be seen. Now a Democratic senator from Illinois, he plans to announce a decision Feb. 10 about the 2008 campaign — though most observers believe that he is in the race.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > Politics)
7:45 PM PST, January 26, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama's entry into politics came on a winter morning at the white-columned Harvard Law Review building when, about 2 a.m., a deeply divided editorial staff chose him as the first African American to lead the prestigious publication.
It was no small accomplishment. Obama, who at nearly 30 was older and more world-wise than most of his classmates, had to navigate among sharply drawn factions of conservatives and liberals to beat 18 other candidates for the job.
Today, as he weighs a bid for the White House, Obama has provoked questions about whether he has the experience to build a winning coalition of voters. But at Harvard Law he showed that — on a much smaller scale — he had the savvy to maneuver through turbulent political waters.
"The Harvard Law Review was a place of petty and vicious internal politics," said Brad Berenson, an editorial board member with Obama and, more recently, an associate White House counsel to President Bush.
"Compared to Washington and the White House and the Supreme Court, the Harvard Law Review was much more politically vicious," Berenson said. "The conservatives threw their support to Obama because he could bridge the gap between both camps and retain the trust and confidence of both."
Whether Obama can reprise his role as political bridge-builder remains to be seen. Now a Democratic senator from Illinois, he plans to announce a decision Feb. 10 about the 2008 campaign — though most observers believe that he is in the race.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, LATimes, Obama
¶ 19:38 0 comments
Cheney's Key Role in Leak Case Detailed (LATimes.com)
A former aide testifies in Libby's trial that the vice president directed the effort to discredit a CIA agent's husband.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
January 26, 2007
WASHINGTON — In the first such account from Vice President Dick Cheney's inner circle, a former aide testified Thursday that Cheney personally directed the effort to discredit an administration critic by having calls made to reporters in 2003.
Cheney dictated detailed "talking points" for his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and others on how they could impugn the critic's credibility, said Catherine J. Martin, who was the vice president's top press aide at the time.
Libby is on trial on charges of obstructing an investigation into how the name of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame, became public. The government says her identity emerged in conversations Libby had with several reporters. It is illegal to knowingly divulge the name of a CIA employee.
Plame's name came up in the conversations because she is the wife of former envoy Joseph C. Wilson IV, the critic whom the administration was trying to attack after he publicly raised questions about the intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq.
Martin, who is now deputy White House director of communications for policy and planning, testified as a prosecution witness on the third day of Libby's trial. She became the third witness to testify that they had told Libby of Plame's identity well before Libby spoke with the reporters.
That contradicts Libby's statement that he learned of Plame's identity from one of the reporters, Tim Russert of NBC News. Libby is charged with lying to federal agents looking into the leak of Plame's name.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > National News)
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
January 26, 2007
WASHINGTON — In the first such account from Vice President Dick Cheney's inner circle, a former aide testified Thursday that Cheney personally directed the effort to discredit an administration critic by having calls made to reporters in 2003.
Cheney dictated detailed "talking points" for his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and others on how they could impugn the critic's credibility, said Catherine J. Martin, who was the vice president's top press aide at the time.
Libby is on trial on charges of obstructing an investigation into how the name of a CIA operative, Valerie Plame, became public. The government says her identity emerged in conversations Libby had with several reporters. It is illegal to knowingly divulge the name of a CIA employee.
Plame's name came up in the conversations because she is the wife of former envoy Joseph C. Wilson IV, the critic whom the administration was trying to attack after he publicly raised questions about the intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq.
Martin, who is now deputy White House director of communications for policy and planning, testified as a prosecution witness on the third day of Libby's trial. She became the third witness to testify that they had told Libby of Plame's identity well before Libby spoke with the reporters.
That contradicts Libby's statement that he learned of Plame's identity from one of the reporters, Tim Russert of NBC News. Libby is charged with lying to federal agents looking into the leak of Plame's name.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > National News)
Labels: Cheney, CIA, LATimes, Plame
¶ 19:35 0 comments
1.21.2007
Racism, Personal Safety Factors in Obama's Deliberations (CNN.com)
POSTED: 8:25 a.m. EST, January 19, 2007
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Jesse Jackson says that as he shares fond memories of his 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns with Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, he also passes along memories of the ugly side.
"There was an antipathy to my running," Jackson said. "We received the most threats of any candidate ever."
Jackson aides and Secret Service officials from those days recall hate mail, racial slurs and death threats aimed at both the candidate and his family.
"I had the most sensitivity to the fact that we had to have security at home. The threats are very real," Jackson said. "Everyplace we went, Secret Service always on edge."
Obama, a Democrat elected to the Senate just two years ago, announced Tuesday on his Web site -- http://www.barackobama.com/ -- that he was forming a presidential exploratory committee.
Obama's aides are reluctant to discuss internal deliberations. But they did say that, of course, racism and security issues were among the factors Obama and his wife considered as they discussed the toll a presidential campaign would have on them and their two young daughters.
In the end, though, aides said, Obama was shaped by his experience in Illinois and his 2006 midterm campaign travels, and he believes that the political environment for blacks is much improved.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Jesse Jackson says that as he shares fond memories of his 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns with Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, he also passes along memories of the ugly side.
"There was an antipathy to my running," Jackson said. "We received the most threats of any candidate ever."
Jackson aides and Secret Service officials from those days recall hate mail, racial slurs and death threats aimed at both the candidate and his family.
"I had the most sensitivity to the fact that we had to have security at home. The threats are very real," Jackson said. "Everyplace we went, Secret Service always on edge."
Obama, a Democrat elected to the Senate just two years ago, announced Tuesday on his Web site -- http://www.barackobama.com/ -- that he was forming a presidential exploratory committee.
Obama's aides are reluctant to discuss internal deliberations. But they did say that, of course, racism and security issues were among the factors Obama and his wife considered as they discussed the toll a presidential campaign would have on them and their two young daughters.
In the end, though, aides said, Obama was shaped by his experience in Illinois and his 2006 midterm campaign travels, and he believes that the political environment for blacks is much improved.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, CNN, Obama
¶ 08:53 0 comments
Landmark UN Study Backs Climate Theory (TheStar.com)
2,000 scientists all but end the debate: Human activity causes global warming
January 19, 2007
Peter Gorrie
Environment Writer
A major new United Nations report shows global scientists are more convinced than ever that human activity is causing climate change, the Toronto Star has learned.
The rate of warming between now and 2030 is likely to be twice that of the previous century, it says.
And it concludes that most of the global warming since the middle of the last century has been caused by man-made greenhouse gases.
The report, to be released in Paris Feb. 2, should all but end any debate on climate change and compel governments and industries to take urgent measures to deal with it, scientists say.
"It is very likely that (man-made) greenhouse gas increases caused most of the globally average temperature increases since the mid-20th century," states the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
In the clinical language of science, it paints a stark picture of the effects of greenhouse gas emissions:
"Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including continental average temperatures, atmospheric circulation patterns and some types of extremes."
It is "very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent." Storm tracks will move from the tropics toward the poles.
The widely anticipated report is the fourth by the IPCC, which every few years publishes the definitive conclusions of about 2,000 scientists who are recognized as experts in their respective fields. Each one has moved closer to closing debate on the causes and effects of climate change.
(More ... Toronto Star)
January 19, 2007
Peter Gorrie
Environment Writer
A major new United Nations report shows global scientists are more convinced than ever that human activity is causing climate change, the Toronto Star has learned.
The rate of warming between now and 2030 is likely to be twice that of the previous century, it says.
And it concludes that most of the global warming since the middle of the last century has been caused by man-made greenhouse gases.
The report, to be released in Paris Feb. 2, should all but end any debate on climate change and compel governments and industries to take urgent measures to deal with it, scientists say.
"It is very likely that (man-made) greenhouse gas increases caused most of the globally average temperature increases since the mid-20th century," states the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
In the clinical language of science, it paints a stark picture of the effects of greenhouse gas emissions:
"Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including continental average temperatures, atmospheric circulation patterns and some types of extremes."
It is "very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent." Storm tracks will move from the tropics toward the poles.
The widely anticipated report is the fourth by the IPCC, which every few years publishes the definitive conclusions of about 2,000 scientists who are recognized as experts in their respective fields. Each one has moved closer to closing debate on the causes and effects of climate change.
(More ... Toronto Star)
Labels: Climate Change, Toronto Star, UN
¶ 08:51 0 comments
Clinton Joins ’08 Field, Fueling Race for Money (NYTimes.com)
By PATRICK HEALY and JEFF ZELENY
Published: January 21, 2007
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton jumped into the 2008 presidential race this morning, immediately squaring off against Senator Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic field in what is effectively the party’s first primary, the competition for campaign donations.
If successful, Mrs. Clinton, 59, would be the first female nominee of a major American political party, and she would become the first spouse of a former president to seek a return to the White House.
Her entrance into the race followed Mr. Obama’s by less than a week, and highlighted the urgency for her of not falling behind in the competition for money, especially in New York, her home turf, where the battle has already reached a fever pitch.
George Soros, the billionaire New York philanthropist, has made maximum donations in the past to both candidates, for instance, and last week he faced a choice: support Mr. Obama, who created his committee on Tuesday, or stay neutral and see what Mrs. Clinton and others had to say. In his case, the upstart won. Mr. Soros sent the maximum contribution, $2,100, to Mr. Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois, just hours after he declared his plans to run.
“Soros believes that Senator Obama brings a new energy to the political system and has the potential to be a transformational leader,” said Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Mr. Soros.
Mrs. Clinton’s presidential operation is only one day old, but she already finds herself in a breakneck competition against Mr. Obama for fund-raising supremacy in two towns that she and her husband have mined heavily for political gold: New York and Hollywood. Mr. Obama’s entrance into the race has also put up for grabs other groups that are primary targets for Mrs. Clinton, including African-Americans and women.
At this early stage in the nomination fight, securing donations and signing up fund-raisers are among the best ways of showing political strength in a crowded field (seven Democrats and counting). And Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are looking to raise at least $75 million this year alone.
(More ... New York Times > Politics)
Published: January 21, 2007
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton jumped into the 2008 presidential race this morning, immediately squaring off against Senator Barack Obama and the rest of the Democratic field in what is effectively the party’s first primary, the competition for campaign donations.
If successful, Mrs. Clinton, 59, would be the first female nominee of a major American political party, and she would become the first spouse of a former president to seek a return to the White House.
Her entrance into the race followed Mr. Obama’s by less than a week, and highlighted the urgency for her of not falling behind in the competition for money, especially in New York, her home turf, where the battle has already reached a fever pitch.
George Soros, the billionaire New York philanthropist, has made maximum donations in the past to both candidates, for instance, and last week he faced a choice: support Mr. Obama, who created his committee on Tuesday, or stay neutral and see what Mrs. Clinton and others had to say. In his case, the upstart won. Mr. Soros sent the maximum contribution, $2,100, to Mr. Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois, just hours after he declared his plans to run.
“Soros believes that Senator Obama brings a new energy to the political system and has the potential to be a transformational leader,” said Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Mr. Soros.
Mrs. Clinton’s presidential operation is only one day old, but she already finds herself in a breakneck competition against Mr. Obama for fund-raising supremacy in two towns that she and her husband have mined heavily for political gold: New York and Hollywood. Mr. Obama’s entrance into the race has also put up for grabs other groups that are primary targets for Mrs. Clinton, including African-Americans and women.
At this early stage in the nomination fight, securing donations and signing up fund-raisers are among the best ways of showing political strength in a crowded field (seven Democrats and counting). And Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are looking to raise at least $75 million this year alone.
(More ... New York Times > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Clinton, New York Times, Obama
¶ 08:47 0 comments
1.18.2007
As the Skeptics Ask Why, Obama Asks Why Not? (NYTimes.com)
By JEFF ZELENY
Published: January 18, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 — There is always, it seems, a fresh new face breezing into a presidential race, offering himself as the person to change the tone, eliminate the vitriol and transform the old ways of politics.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois is auditioning for that role in the 2008 campaign. He said so himself, leaping into the Democratic contest this week on a promise to “advance the cause of change and progress that we so desperately need.”
A long line of Democrats, Republicans and independents have gone before him, casting themselves as the sparkling candidate of the new politics only to find that their freshness withers well before the balloting begins. Think John Anderson, Gary Hart, Ross Perot.
How can Mr. Obama avoid a similar fate?
“Novelty alone is not a criteria for success, nor should it be,” he said in an interview on Wednesday as he walked through the hallways of the Senate. “I do think there are moments in American history where there are opportunities to change the language of politics or set the country’s sights in a different place, and I think we’re in one of those moments.”
Then, after pausing for a moment, he added: “Whether I’m the person to help move that forward or somebody else is, is not for me to determine.”
One day after opening his presidential exploratory committee, a procedural move that created an extraordinary tide of publicity, Mr. Obama returned to work in the Senate. It was the first reminder that even though he bills himself as a man intent on reforming Washington, he still has to report to his day job. In Washington.
And that point alone distinguished Mr. Obama from recent presidential hopefuls who presented themselves as not-from-Washington candidates. Four years ago, for example, Howard Dean returned to the governor’s office in Vermont after his initial foray into the race, and instantly began railing against his rivals stuck in the nation’s capital.
(More ... New York Times > U.S. > Politics)
Published: January 18, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 — There is always, it seems, a fresh new face breezing into a presidential race, offering himself as the person to change the tone, eliminate the vitriol and transform the old ways of politics.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois is auditioning for that role in the 2008 campaign. He said so himself, leaping into the Democratic contest this week on a promise to “advance the cause of change and progress that we so desperately need.”
A long line of Democrats, Republicans and independents have gone before him, casting themselves as the sparkling candidate of the new politics only to find that their freshness withers well before the balloting begins. Think John Anderson, Gary Hart, Ross Perot.
How can Mr. Obama avoid a similar fate?
“Novelty alone is not a criteria for success, nor should it be,” he said in an interview on Wednesday as he walked through the hallways of the Senate. “I do think there are moments in American history where there are opportunities to change the language of politics or set the country’s sights in a different place, and I think we’re in one of those moments.”
Then, after pausing for a moment, he added: “Whether I’m the person to help move that forward or somebody else is, is not for me to determine.”
One day after opening his presidential exploratory committee, a procedural move that created an extraordinary tide of publicity, Mr. Obama returned to work in the Senate. It was the first reminder that even though he bills himself as a man intent on reforming Washington, he still has to report to his day job. In Washington.
And that point alone distinguished Mr. Obama from recent presidential hopefuls who presented themselves as not-from-Washington candidates. Four years ago, for example, Howard Dean returned to the governor’s office in Vermont after his initial foray into the race, and instantly began railing against his rivals stuck in the nation’s capital.
(More ... New York Times > U.S. > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, New York Times, Obama
¶ 22:17 0 comments
Doomsday Clock Winds CLoser to Armageddon (CBC.ca)
Last Updated: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 | 1:21 PM ET
CBC News
The face of the Doomsday Clock shifted two minutes closer to midnight Wednesday, symbolizing the impending destruction of humanity in a "Second Nuclear Age."
Chicago's Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the group that has maintained the timepiece since 1947, wound the minute hand closer to the grim hour for the first time since 2002, when it was frozen at seven minutes to midnight.
Now modern dangers such as global warming and the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea have inched the clock two minutes forward — to five minutes to midnight.
Created in 1947
"The major new step reflects growing concerns about a 'Second Nuclear Age' marked by grave threats," including nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, as well as continuing "launch-ready status" of 2,000 of the 25,000 warheads held by the U.S. and Russia, the scientists said in a statement Tuesday.
The world has used the Doomsday Clock as a measurable way to reflect the perils facing humanity since it was created in 1947. In its first year, the minute hand perched at seven minutes to midnight, and it has edged closer with each worsening nuclear and climate threat, or backwards to indicate more secure times.
(More ... CBC > World)
CBC News
The face of the Doomsday Clock shifted two minutes closer to midnight Wednesday, symbolizing the impending destruction of humanity in a "Second Nuclear Age."
Chicago's Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the group that has maintained the timepiece since 1947, wound the minute hand closer to the grim hour for the first time since 2002, when it was frozen at seven minutes to midnight.
Now modern dangers such as global warming and the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea have inched the clock two minutes forward — to five minutes to midnight.
Created in 1947
"The major new step reflects growing concerns about a 'Second Nuclear Age' marked by grave threats," including nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, as well as continuing "launch-ready status" of 2,000 of the 25,000 warheads held by the U.S. and Russia, the scientists said in a statement Tuesday.
The world has used the Doomsday Clock as a measurable way to reflect the perils facing humanity since it was created in 1947. In its first year, the minute hand perched at seven minutes to midnight, and it has edged closer with each worsening nuclear and climate threat, or backwards to indicate more secure times.
(More ... CBC > World)
Labels: CBC, Iran, North Korea, nuclear proliferation
¶ 22:08 0 comments
What $1.2 trillion Can Buy (NYTimes.com)
By DAVID LEONHARDT
Published: January 17, 2007
The human mind isn’t very well equipped to make sense of a figure like $1.2 trillion. We don’t deal with a trillion of anything in our daily lives, and so when we come across such a big number, it is hard to distinguish it from any other big number. Millions, billions, a trillion — they all start to sound the same.
Likewise, some of their cost estimates — like those covering health care and disability payments for veterans — have risen since the article appeared.
The way to come to grips with $1.2 trillion is to forget about the number itself and think instead about what you could buy with the money. When you do that, a trillion stops sounding anything like millions or billions.
For starters, $1.2 trillion would pay for an unprecedented public health campaign — a doubling of cancer research funding, treatment for every American whose diabetes or heart disease is now going unmanaged and a global immunization campaign to save millions of children’s lives.
Combined, the cost of running those programs for a decade wouldn’t use up even half our money pot. So we could then turn to poverty and education, starting with universal preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old child across the country. The city of New Orleans could also receive a huge increase in reconstruction funds.
The final big chunk of the money could go to national security. The recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that have not been put in place — better baggage and cargo screening, stronger measures against nuclear proliferation — could be enacted. Financing for the war in Afghanistan could be increased to beat back the Taliban’s recent gains, and a peacekeeping force could put a stop to the genocide in Darfur.
(More ... New York Times > Business > Economix)
Published: January 17, 2007
The human mind isn’t very well equipped to make sense of a figure like $1.2 trillion. We don’t deal with a trillion of anything in our daily lives, and so when we come across such a big number, it is hard to distinguish it from any other big number. Millions, billions, a trillion — they all start to sound the same.
Likewise, some of their cost estimates — like those covering health care and disability payments for veterans — have risen since the article appeared.
The way to come to grips with $1.2 trillion is to forget about the number itself and think instead about what you could buy with the money. When you do that, a trillion stops sounding anything like millions or billions.
For starters, $1.2 trillion would pay for an unprecedented public health campaign — a doubling of cancer research funding, treatment for every American whose diabetes or heart disease is now going unmanaged and a global immunization campaign to save millions of children’s lives.
Combined, the cost of running those programs for a decade wouldn’t use up even half our money pot. So we could then turn to poverty and education, starting with universal preschool for every 3- and 4-year-old child across the country. The city of New Orleans could also receive a huge increase in reconstruction funds.
The final big chunk of the money could go to national security. The recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that have not been put in place — better baggage and cargo screening, stronger measures against nuclear proliferation — could be enacted. Financing for the war in Afghanistan could be increased to beat back the Taliban’s recent gains, and a peacekeeping force could put a stop to the genocide in Darfur.
(More ... New York Times > Business > Economix)
Labels: Budget, economy, New York Times
¶ 08:12 0 comments
1.17.2007
UN Clashes With Iraq on Civilian Death Toll (Guardian.co.uk)
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Wednesday January 17, 2007
The Guardian
The UN said yesterday that the civilian death toll in Iraq last year was 34,452 - much higher than previous estimates - as an explosion outside a Baghdad university killed a further 65 people. The bomb at al-Mustansiriya university went off as students were queuing for minivans to take them home at the end of their day's study. About 138 were wounded.
Within an hour, gunmen opened fire in a mainly Shia neighbourhood, killing 11 people and wounding five. The attacks came after 109 bodies were found overnight in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq. Four US soldiers were also killed yesterday by a roadside bomb in the northwest of the country.
The UN report put the death toll for last year much higher than the 12,357 figure released earlier this month by Iraq's interior ministry and the 22,950 reported by the Washington Post last week apparently based on Iraqi health ministry statistics.
The Iraqi government is reluctant to release figures partly from embarrassment and partly because it claims they feed the sectarian violence. It has accused the UN of exaggeration in the past.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > Iraq) ¶ 22:03 0 comments
Wednesday January 17, 2007
The Guardian
The UN said yesterday that the civilian death toll in Iraq last year was 34,452 - much higher than previous estimates - as an explosion outside a Baghdad university killed a further 65 people. The bomb at al-Mustansiriya university went off as students were queuing for minivans to take them home at the end of their day's study. About 138 were wounded.
Within an hour, gunmen opened fire in a mainly Shia neighbourhood, killing 11 people and wounding five. The attacks came after 109 bodies were found overnight in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq. Four US soldiers were also killed yesterday by a roadside bomb in the northwest of the country.
The UN report put the death toll for last year much higher than the 12,357 figure released earlier this month by Iraq's interior ministry and the 22,950 reported by the Washington Post last week apparently based on Iraqi health ministry statistics.
The Iraqi government is reluctant to release figures partly from embarrassment and partly because it claims they feed the sectarian violence. It has accused the UN of exaggeration in the past.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > Iraq) ¶ 22:03 0 comments
Race and Gender Make Democrats' Field Historic (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 17, 2007; Page A01
Democrats moved a step closer yesterday to what shapes up as one of the most historic and compelling contests ever for their party's presidential nomination, a study in contrasting styles and candidacies in which race and gender play central roles in the competition.
At center stage stand Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who set up his presidential exploratory committee yesterday, and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who is set to make clear her intentions soon. Never has a party begun a nomination contest with its two most celebrated candidates a woman and an African American.
The 2008 nomination contest that will play out over the coming year is far more than a two-person race. Former senator John Edwards of North Carolina has already established himself as a genuine contender for the nomination, and the rest of the prospective Democratic field is among the strongest in years.
But initially, the electricity will be generated by the Clinton and Obama candidacies. The news media will find the story line irresistible, and Democrats around the country are eagerly anticipating the competition. "Senator Obama's got the magic, but Hillary Clinton's got the muscle," said Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist who is neutral in the nomination campaign. "This is going to be a titanic fight between energy and charisma on one hand and money and organization on the other."
There are many ways to describe the differences in the two candidacies. Obama will cast the contest as the future vs. the past. Clinton can counter with experience vs. inexperience. Obama opposed the Iraq war from the beginning; Clinton long supported it but has become more critical over time. Clinton begins as the candidate of the party establishment, while Obama will attempt to mount a challenge that draws new voters into the process.
Each will have to overcome perceived liabilities. Many Democrats fear Clinton cannot win a general election because of the baggage she carries from the administration of her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Others see her as so cautious and careful that she cannot convey the warmth and authenticity many voters want in a president.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 17, 2007; Page A01
Democrats moved a step closer yesterday to what shapes up as one of the most historic and compelling contests ever for their party's presidential nomination, a study in contrasting styles and candidacies in which race and gender play central roles in the competition.
At center stage stand Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who set up his presidential exploratory committee yesterday, and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who is set to make clear her intentions soon. Never has a party begun a nomination contest with its two most celebrated candidates a woman and an African American.
The 2008 nomination contest that will play out over the coming year is far more than a two-person race. Former senator John Edwards of North Carolina has already established himself as a genuine contender for the nomination, and the rest of the prospective Democratic field is among the strongest in years.
But initially, the electricity will be generated by the Clinton and Obama candidacies. The news media will find the story line irresistible, and Democrats around the country are eagerly anticipating the competition. "Senator Obama's got the magic, but Hillary Clinton's got the muscle," said Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist who is neutral in the nomination campaign. "This is going to be a titanic fight between energy and charisma on one hand and money and organization on the other."
There are many ways to describe the differences in the two candidacies. Obama will cast the contest as the future vs. the past. Clinton can counter with experience vs. inexperience. Obama opposed the Iraq war from the beginning; Clinton long supported it but has become more critical over time. Clinton begins as the candidate of the party establishment, while Obama will attempt to mount a challenge that draws new voters into the process.
Each will have to overcome perceived liabilities. Many Democrats fear Clinton cannot win a general election because of the baggage she carries from the administration of her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Others see her as so cautious and careful that she cannot convey the warmth and authenticity many voters want in a president.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Clinton, Edwards, Obama, Washington Post
¶ 21:58 0 comments
Obama Takes First Step in White House Bid (ChicagoTribune.com)
By Mike Dorning and Christi Parsons
Washington Bureau
Published January 16, 2007, 10:00 PM CST
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama took an important formal step on Tuesday toward a Democratic presidential campaign that would make him the most formidable African-American candidate ever, offering a call to common purpose as a remedy to bitter partisan divisions and marking a potential turning point in the nation's race relations.
By filing papers to form a presidential exploratory committee, the first-term Illinois senator signaled his intent to run for the presidency, a move that he has been publicly considering for months. Advisers said Obama and his family had made the personal commitment to a grueling, two-year presidential bid and the senator now would concentrate on assembling a campaign apparatus and testing support among financial backers and grass-roots activists.
The Democratic lawmaker will make a formal announcement on his candidacy Feb. 10 in Springfield, Ill., where barely two years ago he served as a mere state senator. He will return a cultural phenomenon, a best-selling author coveted as a guest by television talk show hosts and followed by celebrity photographers. He has come to embody the hopes and dreams of many Americans.
His candidacy would create a historic moment, as the American public contemplates a leader of mixed-race heritage, the son of an African father and white Kansan mother. Race would be a spoken and unspoken subtext to a campaign that also would raise grave policy issues on the war in Iraq, with Obama an early and consistent critic of the ongoing U.S. military mission there.
His efforts to reach toward the center with appeals to common ground is a reversal of the recently successful political formula of polarization to drive up turnout among base voters that won President Bush re-election in 2004.
Obama made the official announcement of his exploratory committee on his Web site, in a simple video that featured him seated, wearing a coat and no tie, telling viewers he wanted to be the first to tell them of the development. He sounded a theme of change, saying he was "struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics."
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Breaking News)
Washington Bureau
Published January 16, 2007, 10:00 PM CST
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama took an important formal step on Tuesday toward a Democratic presidential campaign that would make him the most formidable African-American candidate ever, offering a call to common purpose as a remedy to bitter partisan divisions and marking a potential turning point in the nation's race relations.
By filing papers to form a presidential exploratory committee, the first-term Illinois senator signaled his intent to run for the presidency, a move that he has been publicly considering for months. Advisers said Obama and his family had made the personal commitment to a grueling, two-year presidential bid and the senator now would concentrate on assembling a campaign apparatus and testing support among financial backers and grass-roots activists.
The Democratic lawmaker will make a formal announcement on his candidacy Feb. 10 in Springfield, Ill., where barely two years ago he served as a mere state senator. He will return a cultural phenomenon, a best-selling author coveted as a guest by television talk show hosts and followed by celebrity photographers. He has come to embody the hopes and dreams of many Americans.
His candidacy would create a historic moment, as the American public contemplates a leader of mixed-race heritage, the son of an African father and white Kansan mother. Race would be a spoken and unspoken subtext to a campaign that also would raise grave policy issues on the war in Iraq, with Obama an early and consistent critic of the ongoing U.S. military mission there.
His efforts to reach toward the center with appeals to common ground is a reversal of the recently successful political formula of polarization to drive up turnout among base voters that won President Bush re-election in 2004.
Obama made the official announcement of his exploratory committee on his Web site, in a simple video that featured him seated, wearing a coat and no tie, telling viewers he wanted to be the first to tell them of the development. He sounded a theme of change, saying he was "struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics."
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Breaking News)
Labels: 2008 election, Chicago Tribune, Obama
¶ 21:51 0 comments
1.16.2007
Obama Inches Closer to Announcing (ChicagoTribune.com)
By David Mendell
Tribune staff reporter
Published January 15, 2007, 9:26 PM CST
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama inched closer to revealing his intentions about running for president on Monday, adding a "very" to the "soon" in his assessment about when an announcement will come.
"We will have an announcement very soon," Obama (D-Ill.) told reporters outside St. Mark Cathedral in Harvey after delivering an emotional keynote speech to celebrate Martin Luther King's birth.
Prefacing his address in the church, Obama turned to media crews and declared that he was "not making news today" about a run for the Oval Office.
In recent weeks, Obama has sought advice from a widening circle of political advisers and has hired staff in key states.
Even if many blacks view Obama as the premier political leader, he said that the day of celebration for King would have been the wrong moment to declare whether he will seek the presidency in 2008.
"I didn't want to use this day to indicate my plans because I am humbled by what Dr. King accomplished," he said. "I don't think that whatever my political plans are, [they] are comparable to the heroic struggles that he went through, and I don't want to draw false parallels."
Obama said that he is weighing issues such as his personal safety and loss of privacy but hinted that those matters would not affect his decision.
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Breaking News)
Tribune staff reporter
Published January 15, 2007, 9:26 PM CST
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama inched closer to revealing his intentions about running for president on Monday, adding a "very" to the "soon" in his assessment about when an announcement will come.
"We will have an announcement very soon," Obama (D-Ill.) told reporters outside St. Mark Cathedral in Harvey after delivering an emotional keynote speech to celebrate Martin Luther King's birth.
Prefacing his address in the church, Obama turned to media crews and declared that he was "not making news today" about a run for the Oval Office.
In recent weeks, Obama has sought advice from a widening circle of political advisers and has hired staff in key states.
Even if many blacks view Obama as the premier political leader, he said that the day of celebration for King would have been the wrong moment to declare whether he will seek the presidency in 2008.
"I didn't want to use this day to indicate my plans because I am humbled by what Dr. King accomplished," he said. "I don't think that whatever my political plans are, [they] are comparable to the heroic struggles that he went through, and I don't want to draw false parallels."
Obama said that he is weighing issues such as his personal safety and loss of privacy but hinted that those matters would not affect his decision.
(More ... Chicago Tribune > Breaking News)
Labels: 2008 election, Chicago Tribune, Obama
¶ 22:09 0 comments
1.14.2007
Bush Set for Climate Change U-turn (Guardian.co.uk)
Downing Street says that belated US recognition of global warming could lead to a post-Kyoto agreement on curbing emissions
Gaby Hinsliff, Juliette Jowit and Paul Harris
Sunday January 14, 2007
The Observer
George Bush is preparing to make a historic shift in his position on global warming when he makes his State of the Union speech later this month, say senior Downing Street officials.
Tony Blair hopes that the new stance by the United States will lead to a breakthrough in international talks on climate change and that the outlines of a successor treaty to the Kyoto agreement, the deal to curb emissions of greenhouse gases which expires in 2012, could now be thrashed out at the G8 summit in June.
The timetable may explain why Blair is so keen to remain in office until after the summit, with a deal on protecting the planet offering an appealing legacy with which to bow out of Number 10.
Bush and Blair held private talks on climate change before Christmas, and there is a feeling that the US President will now agree a cap on emissions in the US, meaning that, for the first time, American industry and consumers would be expected to start conserving energy and curbing pollution.
'We could now be seeing the beginning of a consensus on a post-Kyoto framework,' said a source close to the prime minister. 'President Bush is beginning to talk about more radical measures.'
The move will be seen as part of a wider repositioning of the Bush government after its comprehensive defeat in last autumn's mid-term elections.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Observer > World)
Gaby Hinsliff, Juliette Jowit and Paul Harris
Sunday January 14, 2007
The Observer
George Bush is preparing to make a historic shift in his position on global warming when he makes his State of the Union speech later this month, say senior Downing Street officials.
Tony Blair hopes that the new stance by the United States will lead to a breakthrough in international talks on climate change and that the outlines of a successor treaty to the Kyoto agreement, the deal to curb emissions of greenhouse gases which expires in 2012, could now be thrashed out at the G8 summit in June.
The timetable may explain why Blair is so keen to remain in office until after the summit, with a deal on protecting the planet offering an appealing legacy with which to bow out of Number 10.
Bush and Blair held private talks on climate change before Christmas, and there is a feeling that the US President will now agree a cap on emissions in the US, meaning that, for the first time, American industry and consumers would be expected to start conserving energy and curbing pollution.
'We could now be seeing the beginning of a consensus on a post-Kyoto framework,' said a source close to the prime minister. 'President Bush is beginning to talk about more radical measures.'
The move will be seen as part of a wider repositioning of the Bush government after its comprehensive defeat in last autumn's mid-term elections.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Observer > World)
Labels: Bush, Climate Change, Guardian
¶ 21:25 0 comments
Sen. Chris Dodd Says He's Running for President (CNN.com)
POSTED: 8:50 p.m. EST, January 11, 2007
NEW YORK (AP) -- Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd announced Thursday he will run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, saying problems at home and abroad meant it was time for him to "get out of the bleachers and onto the arena floor."
Dodd, a 26-year Senate veteran, told the "Imus in the Morning" radio show he will file paperwork to establish a campaign committee later in the day.
"I know how to do this. I know what has to be done. I'm going to get out and make my case," Dodd said. He described himself as a dark horse in a Democratic field dominated by Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama -- neither of whom have yet entered the race.
The 62-year-old senator declared his candidacy Thursday, joining an already crowded field of Democratic presidential hopefuls including John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich and Tom Vilsack.
Dodd planned to travel late Thursday to Iowa, home to the first nominating caucus in January 2008. On Sunday, Dodd intended to visit South Carolina, an early primary state, according to Lachlan MacIntosh, the state party's executive director.
Kathy Sullivan, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in New Hampshire, said in an interview that she had spoken to Dodd and he said, "'I'm not going to do the exploratory thing. I'm going to plunge right in."'
(More ... CNN > Politics)
NEW YORK (AP) -- Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd announced Thursday he will run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, saying problems at home and abroad meant it was time for him to "get out of the bleachers and onto the arena floor."
Dodd, a 26-year Senate veteran, told the "Imus in the Morning" radio show he will file paperwork to establish a campaign committee later in the day.
"I know how to do this. I know what has to be done. I'm going to get out and make my case," Dodd said. He described himself as a dark horse in a Democratic field dominated by Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama -- neither of whom have yet entered the race.
The 62-year-old senator declared his candidacy Thursday, joining an already crowded field of Democratic presidential hopefuls including John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich and Tom Vilsack.
Dodd planned to travel late Thursday to Iowa, home to the first nominating caucus in January 2008. On Sunday, Dodd intended to visit South Carolina, an early primary state, according to Lachlan MacIntosh, the state party's executive director.
Kathy Sullivan, the chairwoman of the Democratic Party in New Hampshire, said in an interview that she had spoken to Dodd and he said, "'I'm not going to do the exploratory thing. I'm going to plunge right in."'
(More ... CNN > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, CNN, Dodd
¶ 20:34 0 comments
Military Is Expanding Its Intelligence Role in U.S. (NYTimes.com)
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: January 14, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 — The Pentagon has been using a little-known power to obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into domestic intelligence gathering.
The C.I.A. has also been issuing what are known as national security letters to gain access to financial records from American companies, though it has done so only rarely, intelligence officials say.
Banks, credit card companies and other financial institutions receiving the letters usually have turned over documents voluntarily, allowing investigators to examine the financial assets and transactions of American military personnel and civilians, officials say.
The F.B.I., the lead agency on domestic counterterrorism and espionage, has issued thousands of national security letters since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, provoking criticism and court challenges from civil liberties advocates who see them as unjustified intrusions into Americans’ private lives.
But it was not previously known, even to some senior counterterrorism officials, that the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have been using their own “noncompulsory” versions of the letters. Congress has rejected several attempts by the two agencies since 2001 for authority to issue mandatory letters, in part because of concerns about the dangers of expanding their role in domestic spying.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Published: January 14, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 — The Pentagon has been using a little-known power to obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into domestic intelligence gathering.
The C.I.A. has also been issuing what are known as national security letters to gain access to financial records from American companies, though it has done so only rarely, intelligence officials say.
Banks, credit card companies and other financial institutions receiving the letters usually have turned over documents voluntarily, allowing investigators to examine the financial assets and transactions of American military personnel and civilians, officials say.
The F.B.I., the lead agency on domestic counterterrorism and espionage, has issued thousands of national security letters since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, provoking criticism and court challenges from civil liberties advocates who see them as unjustified intrusions into Americans’ private lives.
But it was not previously known, even to some senior counterterrorism officials, that the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have been using their own “noncompulsory” versions of the letters. Congress has rejected several attempts by the two agencies since 2001 for authority to issue mandatory letters, in part because of concerns about the dangers of expanding their role in domestic spying.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Labels: CIA, Civil Liberties, Domestic Espionage, New York Times
¶ 20:28 0 comments
Pentagon Won't Back Official Who Blasted Gitmo Lawyers (CNN.com)
(More ... CNN > Politics)
POSTED: 5:51 p.m. EST, January 13, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon on Saturday disavowed a senior official's remarks suggesting companies boycott law firms that represent detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Charles "Cully" Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, said in a radio interview last week that companies might want to consider taking their business to firms that do not represent suspected terrorists.
Stimson's remarks were viewed by legal experts and advocacy groups as an attempt to intimidate law firms that provide legal help to all people, even unpopular defendants.
A Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col. Brian Maka, said Stimson was not speaking for the Bush administration.
Stimson's comments "do not represent the views of the Department of Defense or the thinking of its leadership," Maka told The Associated Press on Saturday.
Stimson's "shameful and irresponsible" remarks deserve condemnation, said Neal Sonnett, a Miami lawyer and president of the American Judicature Society, a nonpartisan group of judges, lawyers and others.
(More ... CNN > Politics)
Labels: CNN, Guantanamo
¶ 20:24 0 comments
1.12.2007
More Guns Equals More Murders in U.S. (Reuters.com)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - American states where more people own guns have higher murder rates, including murders of children, researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health reported on Thursday.
The study, certain to provoke arguments in a country where gun ownership is an important political issue, found that about one in three U.S. households reported firearm ownership.
"Our findings suggest that in the United States, household firearms may be an important source of guns used to kill children, women and men, both on the street and in their homes," said Matthew Miller, assistant professor of health policy and injury prevention, who led the study.
His team used data from a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of 200,000 people in all 50 states.
(More ... Reuters > News > U.S.)
The study, certain to provoke arguments in a country where gun ownership is an important political issue, found that about one in three U.S. households reported firearm ownership.
"Our findings suggest that in the United States, household firearms may be an important source of guns used to kill children, women and men, both on the street and in their homes," said Matthew Miller, assistant professor of health policy and injury prevention, who led the study.
His team used data from a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of 200,000 people in all 50 states.
(More ... Reuters > News > U.S.)
Labels: Gun Control, Reuters
¶ 18:38 0 comments
Limited Effect on British Plans (Guardian.co.uk)
Julian Borger and Richard Norton-Taylor
Friday January 12, 2007
The Guardian
Tony Blair's government voiced its support for President Bush's surge in Iraq even though it left the two allies moving in opposite directions for the first time: the US is pouring more resources in, while Britain hopes to withdraw a significant number of troops by early summer.
The Foreign Office yesterday insisted that the contrast reflected a divergence in conditions rather than a conflict in policy. Margaret Beckett, the foreign secretary, told a joint session of the Commons defence and foreign affairs committees that the implications of the US change in policy for Britain would be "somewhat limited". She added: "I would say that it's a change of direction, as the president says, for the United States and doesn't necessarily imply a change of direction for us."
She specifically emphasised the point that, unlike the US, Britain's policy was one of engaging with Iran and Syria.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Politics > Special Reports)
Friday January 12, 2007
The Guardian
Tony Blair's government voiced its support for President Bush's surge in Iraq even though it left the two allies moving in opposite directions for the first time: the US is pouring more resources in, while Britain hopes to withdraw a significant number of troops by early summer.
The Foreign Office yesterday insisted that the contrast reflected a divergence in conditions rather than a conflict in policy. Margaret Beckett, the foreign secretary, told a joint session of the Commons defence and foreign affairs committees that the implications of the US change in policy for Britain would be "somewhat limited". She added: "I would say that it's a change of direction, as the president says, for the United States and doesn't necessarily imply a change of direction for us."
She specifically emphasised the point that, unlike the US, Britain's policy was one of engaging with Iran and Syria.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Politics > Special Reports)
Labels: Guardian, Iran, Iraq, Syria
¶ 18:28 0 comments
The Real Disaster (NYTImes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: January 11, 2007
President Bush told Americans last night that failure in Iraq would be a disaster. The disaster is Mr. Bush’s war, and he has already failed. Last night was his chance to stop offering more fog and be honest with the nation, and he did not take it.
Americans needed to hear a clear plan to extricate United States troops from the disaster that Mr. Bush created. What they got was more gauzy talk of victory in the war on terrorism and of creating a “young democracy” in Iraq. In other words, a way for this president to run out the clock and leave his mess for the next one.
Mr. Bush did acknowledge that some of his previous tactics had failed. But even then, the president sounded as if he were an accidental tourist in Iraq. He described the failure of last year’s effort to pacify Baghdad as if the White House and the Pentagon bore no responsibility.
In any case, Mr. Bush’s excuses were tragically inadequate. The nation needs an eyes-wide-open recognition that the only goal left is to get the U.S. military out of this civil war in a way that could minimize the slaughter of Iraqis and reduce the chances that the chaos Mr. Bush unleashed will engulf Iraq’s neighbors.
What it certainly did not need were more of Mr. Bush’s open-ended threats to Iran and Syria.
(More ... New York Times > Editorial)
Published: January 11, 2007
President Bush told Americans last night that failure in Iraq would be a disaster. The disaster is Mr. Bush’s war, and he has already failed. Last night was his chance to stop offering more fog and be honest with the nation, and he did not take it.
Americans needed to hear a clear plan to extricate United States troops from the disaster that Mr. Bush created. What they got was more gauzy talk of victory in the war on terrorism and of creating a “young democracy” in Iraq. In other words, a way for this president to run out the clock and leave his mess for the next one.
Mr. Bush did acknowledge that some of his previous tactics had failed. But even then, the president sounded as if he were an accidental tourist in Iraq. He described the failure of last year’s effort to pacify Baghdad as if the White House and the Pentagon bore no responsibility.
In any case, Mr. Bush’s excuses were tragically inadequate. The nation needs an eyes-wide-open recognition that the only goal left is to get the U.S. military out of this civil war in a way that could minimize the slaughter of Iraqis and reduce the chances that the chaos Mr. Bush unleashed will engulf Iraq’s neighbors.
What it certainly did not need were more of Mr. Bush’s open-ended threats to Iran and Syria.
(More ... New York Times > Editorial)
Labels: Iran, Iraq, New York Times, Opinion, Syria
¶ 18:19 0 comments
Hagel Comment on Bush Plan to Increase U.S. Troops in Iraq (SWNebr.net)
During a Senate hearing to receive testimony concerning the U.S. troop surge in Iraq from Secretary of State Condolezza Rice, Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, was quoted today as saying, "I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam if it's carried out."
In a hometown newspaper commentary, he extends his analysis ...
Article Posted: 01/11/2007 10:05:30 AM
Senator Hagel:
“I am opposed to the escalation of American involvement in Iraq, including more U.S. troops. This is a dangerously wrong-headed strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp at a great cost.
"It is wrong to place American troops into the middle of Iraq’s civil war. It is not in America’s national interest to increase our troop presence in Iraq. The President’s strategy will cost more American lives; sink us deeper into the bog of Iraq making it more difficult to get out; cost billions of dollars more; further strain an American military that has already reached its breaking point; further diminish America’s standing in the Middle East; and continue to allow the Iraqis to walk away from their responsibilities. The fate of Iraq will be determined by the Iraqis—not the Americans. We have already given four years, thousands of lives, and hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Iraq.
“We cannot escape the reality that there will be no military solution in Iraq. The Iraqis are the only ones who can stop the sectarian and inter-sectarian violence that is now consuming their country. Iraqi leaders must understand the stark choice that they face between widening anarchy and violence and a concerted Iraqi effort toward political reconciliation. We cannot want success for Iraq more than they want it for themselves. More American troops, treasure and casualties will not change this reality. It will make it worse. General Abizaid testified to this point in November before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
(More ... South west Nebraska News > Article)
In a hometown newspaper commentary, he extends his analysis ...
Article Posted: 01/11/2007 10:05:30 AM
Senator Hagel:
“I am opposed to the escalation of American involvement in Iraq, including more U.S. troops. This is a dangerously wrong-headed strategy that will drive America deeper into an unwinnable swamp at a great cost.
"It is wrong to place American troops into the middle of Iraq’s civil war. It is not in America’s national interest to increase our troop presence in Iraq. The President’s strategy will cost more American lives; sink us deeper into the bog of Iraq making it more difficult to get out; cost billions of dollars more; further strain an American military that has already reached its breaking point; further diminish America’s standing in the Middle East; and continue to allow the Iraqis to walk away from their responsibilities. The fate of Iraq will be determined by the Iraqis—not the Americans. We have already given four years, thousands of lives, and hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Iraq.
“We cannot escape the reality that there will be no military solution in Iraq. The Iraqis are the only ones who can stop the sectarian and inter-sectarian violence that is now consuming their country. Iraqi leaders must understand the stark choice that they face between widening anarchy and violence and a concerted Iraqi effort toward political reconciliation. We cannot want success for Iraq more than they want it for themselves. More American troops, treasure and casualties will not change this reality. It will make it worse. General Abizaid testified to this point in November before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
(More ... South west Nebraska News > Article)
Labels: 2008 election, Iraq
¶ 18:07 0 comments
Anderton Attacks Iraq as "Another Vietnam" (Stuff.co.nz)
BY DAN HUTCHINSON and KIM RUSCOE - The Dominion Post | Friday, 12 January 2007
Reuters
The Government's duty minister has launched a blistering attack on United States President George W Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.
Duty minister Jim Anderton is drawing comparisons with the Vietnam War fiasco as President Bush prepares to dispatch a further 21,500 soldiers to Iraq.
But Prime Minister Helen Clark was quick to distance herself from the comments, claiming they were not made on behalf of the Government.
Mr Bush announced the extra troops yesterday as an attempt to restore order to the blood-stained streets of Baghdad. Asked for Government reaction, Mr Anderton compared the Iraq campaign to the mistakes of Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Vietnam.
"It is hard to see how an additional 20,000-25,000 troops are going to be capable of making any real difference and this has an eerie Vietnam revisited element to it.
"One wonders whether the lessons I would have expected to be learnt from that fiasco have been learnt in any way at all.
"It is literally years since Mr Bush landed on an aircraft carrier and announced the war was over. I don't know whether he remembers that," he said.
"It is very easy to get into (wars) but very hard to get out of them. The US is not the first or the last military power to find that out.
"We remain consistent with our original view about military action not being a sustainable or long-term contributor to the peaceful development of Iraq," he said.
But Miss Clark claimed yesterday that Mr Anderton was speaking as leader of the Progressive Party and local MP, not as the Government's duty minister.
Mr Anderton was specifically asked, as duty minister, for Government comment on the issue.
(More ... Stuff > Dominion Post > World) ¶ 08:18 0 comments
Reuters
The Government's duty minister has launched a blistering attack on United States President George W Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.
Duty minister Jim Anderton is drawing comparisons with the Vietnam War fiasco as President Bush prepares to dispatch a further 21,500 soldiers to Iraq.
But Prime Minister Helen Clark was quick to distance herself from the comments, claiming they were not made on behalf of the Government.
Mr Bush announced the extra troops yesterday as an attempt to restore order to the blood-stained streets of Baghdad. Asked for Government reaction, Mr Anderton compared the Iraq campaign to the mistakes of Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Vietnam.
"It is hard to see how an additional 20,000-25,000 troops are going to be capable of making any real difference and this has an eerie Vietnam revisited element to it.
"One wonders whether the lessons I would have expected to be learnt from that fiasco have been learnt in any way at all.
"It is literally years since Mr Bush landed on an aircraft carrier and announced the war was over. I don't know whether he remembers that," he said.
"It is very easy to get into (wars) but very hard to get out of them. The US is not the first or the last military power to find that out.
"We remain consistent with our original view about military action not being a sustainable or long-term contributor to the peaceful development of Iraq," he said.
But Miss Clark claimed yesterday that Mr Anderton was speaking as leader of the Progressive Party and local MP, not as the Government's duty minister.
Mr Anderton was specifically asked, as duty minister, for Government comment on the issue.
(More ... Stuff > Dominion Post > World) ¶ 08:18 0 comments
1.11.2007
Life at $7.25 an Hour (WashingtonPost.com)
As House Prepares to Vote on Minimum-Wage Increase, Issue Is Complex for Those Who Earn, or Pay, That Amount
By David Finkel
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; Page A01
ATCHISON, Kan. -- It was payday. Money, at last. Twenty-two-year-old Robert Iles wanted to celebrate. "Tonight, chimichangas!" he announced.
He was on his way out of the store where his full-time job pays him $7.25 an hour -- the rate that is likely to become the nation's new minimum wage. Life at $7.25: This is the life of Robert Iles, and with $70 in a wallet that had been empty that morning, he headed to a grocery store where for $4.98 he bought not only 10 chimichangas but two burritos as well.
From there he stopped at a convenience store, where for $16.70 he filled the gas tank of the car he purchased when he got his raise to $7.25; then he went to another grocery store, where he got a $21.78 money order to pay down some bills, including $8,000 in medical bills from the day he accidentally sliced open several fingers with a knife while trying to cut a tomato; and then he headed toward the family trailer 19 miles away, where his parents were waiting for dinner.
Today in Washington, the House is scheduled to vote on whether to increase the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25. Passage is expected, with Senate approval soon to follow, and if President Bush signs the resulting bill into law, as he indicated he would, the U.S. minimum wage would rise for the first time since 1997, ending a debate about whether such a raise would be good or bad for the economy.
But even if the matter is settled in Congress, it isn't settled at all in Atchison, and Robert Iles's drive home is proof. Every stop he made on his ride home revealed a different facet of how complicated the minimum wage can be in the parts of America where, instead of a debatable issue, it is a way of life.
(More ... Washington Post > National)
By David Finkel
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; Page A01
ATCHISON, Kan. -- It was payday. Money, at last. Twenty-two-year-old Robert Iles wanted to celebrate. "Tonight, chimichangas!" he announced.
He was on his way out of the store where his full-time job pays him $7.25 an hour -- the rate that is likely to become the nation's new minimum wage. Life at $7.25: This is the life of Robert Iles, and with $70 in a wallet that had been empty that morning, he headed to a grocery store where for $4.98 he bought not only 10 chimichangas but two burritos as well.
From there he stopped at a convenience store, where for $16.70 he filled the gas tank of the car he purchased when he got his raise to $7.25; then he went to another grocery store, where he got a $21.78 money order to pay down some bills, including $8,000 in medical bills from the day he accidentally sliced open several fingers with a knife while trying to cut a tomato; and then he headed toward the family trailer 19 miles away, where his parents were waiting for dinner.
Today in Washington, the House is scheduled to vote on whether to increase the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25. Passage is expected, with Senate approval soon to follow, and if President Bush signs the resulting bill into law, as he indicated he would, the U.S. minimum wage would rise for the first time since 1997, ending a debate about whether such a raise would be good or bad for the economy.
But even if the matter is settled in Congress, it isn't settled at all in Atchison, and Robert Iles's drive home is proof. Every stop he made on his ride home revealed a different facet of how complicated the minimum wage can be in the parts of America where, instead of a debatable issue, it is a way of life.
(More ... Washington Post > National)
Labels: Minimum Wage, Washington Post
¶ 22:17 0 comments
Democrat Dodd to Jump Into 2008 White House Race (Reuters.com)
Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:35pm ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, a five-term Senate veteran and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, will enter the 2008 presidential race on Thursday, party officials said.
Dodd, who considered a White House bid in 2004 but decided against it, will announce his candidacy on an early-morning radio show just hours after President George W. Bush's national address on Iraq.
Dodd has been a frequent visitor in recent months to states with influential early nominating contests like Iowa and New Hampshire as he pondered a presidential bid. Officials said he would formally declare his candidacy and make a visit to Iowa later on Thursday.
"He said he is getting right in the race rather than form an exploratory committee," said New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairwoman Kathy Sullivan, who spoke to Dodd on Wednesday. "He will bring a lot to the race."
Dodd, who is little known outside of his home state of Connecticut, enters a Democratic presidential field with three declared candidates -- former vice presidential nominee John Edwards, former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich -- and more expected in the next few weeks.
Likely candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York leads early polls of the race, while rising party star Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois has garnered heavy early attention.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware also are expected to join the race to succeed Bush.
(More ... Reuters > Politics)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, a five-term Senate veteran and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, will enter the 2008 presidential race on Thursday, party officials said.
Dodd, who considered a White House bid in 2004 but decided against it, will announce his candidacy on an early-morning radio show just hours after President George W. Bush's national address on Iraq.
Dodd has been a frequent visitor in recent months to states with influential early nominating contests like Iowa and New Hampshire as he pondered a presidential bid. Officials said he would formally declare his candidacy and make a visit to Iowa later on Thursday.
"He said he is getting right in the race rather than form an exploratory committee," said New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairwoman Kathy Sullivan, who spoke to Dodd on Wednesday. "He will bring a lot to the race."
Dodd, who is little known outside of his home state of Connecticut, enters a Democratic presidential field with three declared candidates -- former vice presidential nominee John Edwards, former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich -- and more expected in the next few weeks.
Likely candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York leads early polls of the race, while rising party star Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois has garnered heavy early attention.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware also are expected to join the race to succeed Bush.
(More ... Reuters > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Dodd, Reuters
¶ 22:09 0 comments
Civil Liberties Group Accuses CIA of Prison Abuse Cover-up (ABC.net.au)
Last Update: Thursday, January 11, 2007. 4:05pm (AEDT)
A CIA refusal to release two secret documents on its prisons and their interrogation methods points to a cover-up of unlawful abuse, a leading US civil rights group has said.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which with four other organisations has an ongoing lawsuit against the CIA, says the CIA had filed a declaration arguing they should not be forced to release two US Justice Department memos because of national security.
The ACLU says two memos discuss a presidential order concerning the CIA's authorisation to set up detention facilities outside the US and permissible interrogation methods.
"The CIA's declaration uses national security as a pretext for withholding evidence that high-level government officials in all likelihood authorised abusive techniques that amount to torture," ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said.
"This declaration is especially disturbing because it suggests that unlawful interrogation techniques cleared by the Justice Department for use by the CIA still remain in effect.
"The American public has a right to know how the Government is treating its prisoners."
(More ... ABC News)
A CIA refusal to release two secret documents on its prisons and their interrogation methods points to a cover-up of unlawful abuse, a leading US civil rights group has said.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which with four other organisations has an ongoing lawsuit against the CIA, says the CIA had filed a declaration arguing they should not be forced to release two US Justice Department memos because of national security.
The ACLU says two memos discuss a presidential order concerning the CIA's authorisation to set up detention facilities outside the US and permissible interrogation methods.
"The CIA's declaration uses national security as a pretext for withholding evidence that high-level government officials in all likelihood authorised abusive techniques that amount to torture," ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said.
"This declaration is especially disturbing because it suggests that unlawful interrogation techniques cleared by the Justice Department for use by the CIA still remain in effect.
"The American public has a right to know how the Government is treating its prisoners."
(More ... ABC News)
Labels: ABC (Aus), CIA, Civil Liberties, Extraordinary Rendition
¶ 21:56 0 comments
Bol Move on Global Warming (SFGate.com)
A WORLD FIRST: California governor to order new standard to reduce carbon content of motor fuels
Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
(01-10) 04:00 PST Sacramento -- California will create the world's first global warming pollution standard for transportation fuels, ratcheting down fuel carbon content 10 percent by 2020 under a plan put forward by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Tuesday in his State of the State address.
The new standard could have implications for the auto industry and change the way gasoline is produced around the globe. Environmentalists hailed it as a way to reduce one of the state's chief sources of greenhouse gas emissions and kick-start fledgling alternative fuel technologies.
"This is a big deal. This policy will be noticed worldwide," said Eric Heitz, president of the Energy Foundation, which monitors the world's energy technology.
Advocates of the proposal said competition from alternative fuels and a reduction in dependence on oil would prevent gasoline prices from rising, but oil companies said changing the mix of fuels to reduce carbon emissions would carry a cost.
"I can't predict what the price will do. All these decisions we will be making going forward will be difficult. There will be economic consequences somewhere," said Cathy Reheis-Boyd, Sacramento lobbyist for the Western States Petroleum Association. "How much and who they're allocated to remains to be seen."
The plan gives the makers of gasoline and diesel fuel discretion in how they reach the target. They can either reformulate their fuel or increase use of alternative fuels such as ethanol, natural gas and hydrogen.
(More ... San Francisco Chronicle > News)
Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
(01-10) 04:00 PST Sacramento -- California will create the world's first global warming pollution standard for transportation fuels, ratcheting down fuel carbon content 10 percent by 2020 under a plan put forward by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Tuesday in his State of the State address.
The new standard could have implications for the auto industry and change the way gasoline is produced around the globe. Environmentalists hailed it as a way to reduce one of the state's chief sources of greenhouse gas emissions and kick-start fledgling alternative fuel technologies.
"This is a big deal. This policy will be noticed worldwide," said Eric Heitz, president of the Energy Foundation, which monitors the world's energy technology.
Advocates of the proposal said competition from alternative fuels and a reduction in dependence on oil would prevent gasoline prices from rising, but oil companies said changing the mix of fuels to reduce carbon emissions would carry a cost.
"I can't predict what the price will do. All these decisions we will be making going forward will be difficult. There will be economic consequences somewhere," said Cathy Reheis-Boyd, Sacramento lobbyist for the Western States Petroleum Association. "How much and who they're allocated to remains to be seen."
The plan gives the makers of gasoline and diesel fuel discretion in how they reach the target. They can either reformulate their fuel or increase use of alternative fuels such as ethanol, natural gas and hydrogen.
(More ... San Francisco Chronicle > News)
Labels: Climate Change, San Francisco Chronicle, Schwarzenegger
¶ 08:26 0 comments
1.09.2007
On FBI's Wanted List - All of Your Fingerprints (NZHerald.co.nz)
Monday January 08, 2007
By David Eames
The tens of thousands of New Zealanders who visit the United States each year will soon have their fingerprints recorded and stored on FBI databases as they arrive.
Under plans to combat terrorism, the US Government will demand that visitors have all 10 fingers scanned when they enter the country. The information will be shared with intelligence agencies, including the FBI, with no restrictions on their international use.
At present, US airport scanners take only two fingerprints from travellers. The move to 10 allows the information to be compatible with the FBI database.
The Department of Homeland Security is expected to roll out the measures from the middle of the year, with 10 airports - including New York, Washington, and Miami - leading the way.
Countries subject to the new scheme include New Zealand, Australia, Japan and European Union nations.
Travel statistics website Asmal shows that as many as 139,000 New Zealanders visited the US in the 12 months to September, 3 per cent more than the previous year.
The 10-print plan has infuriated civil liberties groups in New Zealand and overseas.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > National News)
By David Eames
The tens of thousands of New Zealanders who visit the United States each year will soon have their fingerprints recorded and stored on FBI databases as they arrive.
Under plans to combat terrorism, the US Government will demand that visitors have all 10 fingers scanned when they enter the country. The information will be shared with intelligence agencies, including the FBI, with no restrictions on their international use.
At present, US airport scanners take only two fingerprints from travellers. The move to 10 allows the information to be compatible with the FBI database.
The Department of Homeland Security is expected to roll out the measures from the middle of the year, with 10 airports - including New York, Washington, and Miami - leading the way.
Countries subject to the new scheme include New Zealand, Australia, Japan and European Union nations.
Travel statistics website Asmal shows that as many as 139,000 New Zealanders visited the US in the 12 months to September, 3 per cent more than the previous year.
The 10-print plan has infuriated civil liberties groups in New Zealand and overseas.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > National News)
Labels: Civil Liberties, GWOT, New Zealand Herald
¶ 08:31 0 comments
Outside Court, Roberts Hears Dissent (WashingtonPost.com)
Critics Deride Fear of 'Constitutional Crisis' Over Judicial Pay
By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 8, 2007; Page A13
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. usually knows just the right thing to say, his star turn during his 2005 Senate confirmation hearings being Exhibit A.
But maybe not so with the blandly titled "2006 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary," issued, as he noted, on the typically slow news day of Jan. 1. He should rest assured that it has been noticed -- and roundly razzed by some in the legal punditry and that segment of the citizenry that likes to write angry letters to the editor and leave sputtering rants on the answering machines of reporters who write about the court.
Roberts devoted his entire address to the call for a pay raise for federal judges, a subject that he noted was not new, and one -- he didn't note this -- that might never be terribly popular with those who make less than $165,200 a year, which is what federal district judges and members of Congress make (Roberts's salary is $212,000).
There are plenty of people who agree with Roberts that judicial salaries should rise to attract and retain the brightest in the legal field. But his description of the issue as a "constitutional crisis" was too much for some.
"What should we say about a Chief Justice who suggests that it is a 'constitutional crisis' if Congress takes advantage of its constitutional prerogatives to refuse to raise the salaries of federal judges?" University of Texas law professor Sanford V. Levinson asked on the legal blog Balkinization. "As it happens, I agree with him that pay raises are long overdue, but not necessarily for members of the US Supreme Court, frankly, who have cushy jobs and are treated like kings and queens."
(More ... Washington Post > Politics > Washington Page)
By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 8, 2007; Page A13
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. usually knows just the right thing to say, his star turn during his 2005 Senate confirmation hearings being Exhibit A.
But maybe not so with the blandly titled "2006 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary," issued, as he noted, on the typically slow news day of Jan. 1. He should rest assured that it has been noticed -- and roundly razzed by some in the legal punditry and that segment of the citizenry that likes to write angry letters to the editor and leave sputtering rants on the answering machines of reporters who write about the court.
Roberts devoted his entire address to the call for a pay raise for federal judges, a subject that he noted was not new, and one -- he didn't note this -- that might never be terribly popular with those who make less than $165,200 a year, which is what federal district judges and members of Congress make (Roberts's salary is $212,000).
There are plenty of people who agree with Roberts that judicial salaries should rise to attract and retain the brightest in the legal field. But his description of the issue as a "constitutional crisis" was too much for some.
"What should we say about a Chief Justice who suggests that it is a 'constitutional crisis' if Congress takes advantage of its constitutional prerogatives to refuse to raise the salaries of federal judges?" University of Texas law professor Sanford V. Levinson asked on the legal blog Balkinization. "As it happens, I agree with him that pay raises are long overdue, but not necessarily for members of the US Supreme Court, frankly, who have cushy jobs and are treated like kings and queens."
(More ... Washington Post > Politics > Washington Page)
Labels: SCOTUS, Washington Post
¶ 08:28 0 comments
Democrats Vow to Resist Buildup (WashingtonPost.com)
Coming Iraq Plan to Meet Harsh Scrutiny
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 8, 2007; Page A04
Democratic congressional leaders vowed yesterday to use their powers of spending and policy oversight to challenge President Bush's expected proposal this week, as part of a broad revision of Iraq strategy, for boosting U.S. military forces in the country by as many as 20,000 troops.
Calling Iraq a nation in "complete chaos," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democrats cast the anticipated Bush plan as an escalation of the Iraq war that goes against the advice of senior U.S. commanders, rather than the significant change of course sought by American voters, and said that as a result they would treat the plan -- and new funding requests -- with strong skepticism.
"If the president wants to add to this mission, he's going to have to justify it," Pelosi said on CBS's "Face the Nation," emphasizing that while Congress will not cut off funding for troops now in Iraq, the White House will no longer have a "blank check" for expanding the war effort.
"When the bill comes . . . it will receive the harshest scrutiny," she said, referring to a new supplemental spending request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that is expected to surpass $100 billion. Since Sept. 11, 2001, more than $500 billion has been spent on the wars and counterterrorism-related expenditures around the world, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The extra troops are only one part of the package Bush is expected to present to the nation as early as Wednesday. Proposals for economic development and the setting of political benchmarks for Baghdad, leading to the formation of a national reconciliation government, are also expected from Bush's prime-time speech, although final details were being ironed out over the weekend.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 8, 2007; Page A04
Democratic congressional leaders vowed yesterday to use their powers of spending and policy oversight to challenge President Bush's expected proposal this week, as part of a broad revision of Iraq strategy, for boosting U.S. military forces in the country by as many as 20,000 troops.
Calling Iraq a nation in "complete chaos," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democrats cast the anticipated Bush plan as an escalation of the Iraq war that goes against the advice of senior U.S. commanders, rather than the significant change of course sought by American voters, and said that as a result they would treat the plan -- and new funding requests -- with strong skepticism.
"If the president wants to add to this mission, he's going to have to justify it," Pelosi said on CBS's "Face the Nation," emphasizing that while Congress will not cut off funding for troops now in Iraq, the White House will no longer have a "blank check" for expanding the war effort.
"When the bill comes . . . it will receive the harshest scrutiny," she said, referring to a new supplemental spending request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that is expected to surpass $100 billion. Since Sept. 11, 2001, more than $500 billion has been spent on the wars and counterterrorism-related expenditures around the world, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The extra troops are only one part of the package Bush is expected to present to the nation as early as Wednesday. Proposals for economic development and the setting of political benchmarks for Baghdad, leading to the formation of a national reconciliation government, are also expected from Bush's prime-time speech, although final details were being ironed out over the weekend.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Labels: Iraq, Washington Post
¶ 08:25 0 comments
Democrats Not Ruling Out Higher Taxes for Rich (CNN.com)
POSTED: 10:17 a.m. EST, January 8, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats are not ruling out raising taxes for the wealthiest people to help pay for tax cuts for middle-income families, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
She spoke of pursuing an estimated $300 billion that people owe in back taxes, eliminating deficit spending and reducing wasteful federal spending.
"As we review what we get from ... collecting our taxes and reducing waste, fraud and abuse, investing in education and in initiatives which will bring money into the Treasury, it may be that (repealing) tax cuts for those making over a certain amount of money, $500,000 a year, might be more important to the American people than ignoring the educational and health needs of America's children," Pelosi, D-California, said in an interview aired Sunday. (Interactive: What House Democrats pledge to pass in the first 100 legislative hours)
A budget rule, known as the pay-as-you-go rule, that was approved by the Democratic-run House on Friday requires that tax cuts have corresponding cuts in government spending or tax increases elsewhere to pay for them. (Full story: New budget rules could straitjacket Democrats)
"What we're saying is Democrats propose tax cuts for middle-income families. And we want to have 'pay-go,' no new deficit spending. We're not going to start with repealing tax cuts, but they certainly are not off the table for people making over half a million dollars a year," Pelosi said.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 08:20 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats are not ruling out raising taxes for the wealthiest people to help pay for tax cuts for middle-income families, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
She spoke of pursuing an estimated $300 billion that people owe in back taxes, eliminating deficit spending and reducing wasteful federal spending.
"As we review what we get from ... collecting our taxes and reducing waste, fraud and abuse, investing in education and in initiatives which will bring money into the Treasury, it may be that (repealing) tax cuts for those making over a certain amount of money, $500,000 a year, might be more important to the American people than ignoring the educational and health needs of America's children," Pelosi, D-California, said in an interview aired Sunday. (Interactive: What House Democrats pledge to pass in the first 100 legislative hours)
A budget rule, known as the pay-as-you-go rule, that was approved by the Democratic-run House on Friday requires that tax cuts have corresponding cuts in government spending or tax increases elsewhere to pay for them. (Full story: New budget rules could straitjacket Democrats)
"What we're saying is Democrats propose tax cuts for middle-income families. And we want to have 'pay-go,' no new deficit spending. We're not going to start with repealing tax cuts, but they certainly are not off the table for people making over half a million dollars a year," Pelosi said.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 08:20 0 comments
1.06.2007
Weaning the Military from the GOP (LATimes.com)
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR: ROSA BROOKS
A less partisan military is good for democracy and allows a more frank debate on national security.
January 5, 2007
BURIED IN THE NEWS last week was one of the most potentially significant stories of recent years. The Military Times released its annual poll of active-duty service members, and the results showed something virtually unprecedented: a one-year decline of 10 percentage points in the number of military personnel identifying themselves as Republicans. In the 2004 poll, the percentage of military respondents who characterized themselves as Republicans stood at 60%. By the end of 2005, that had dropped to 56%. And by the end of 2006, the percentage of military Republicans plummeted to 46%.
The drop in Republican Party identification among active-duty personnel is a sharp reversal of a 30-year trend toward the "Republicanization" of the U.S. military, and it could mark a sea change in the nature of the military — and the nature of public debates about national security issues.
For most of U.S. history, issues of national security rarely divided Americans along sharp party lines: The old adage that "politics ends at the water's edge" generally held true. The military, while institutionally conservative with a small "c," was not closely identified with a particular political party. But somewhere between the end of the Vietnam War and the middle of the Clinton era, the U.S. military began to look like a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Republican Party.
The rightward shift was dramatic: In 1976, 25% of civilians characterized themselves as Republicans, while 33% of military officers were Republicans — a military-civilian "gap" of only 8%. By 1996, the military-civilian gap on party affiliation had grown to 33%; while 34% of civilians self-identified as Republicans, so did a whopping 70% of military officers.
In Britain, the Anglican Church used to be snidely described as "the Tory Party at Prayer." In the United States over the last 30 years, the military became, to a significant extent, the Republican Party at War.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > Opinion > Op Ed)
A less partisan military is good for democracy and allows a more frank debate on national security.
January 5, 2007
BURIED IN THE NEWS last week was one of the most potentially significant stories of recent years. The Military Times released its annual poll of active-duty service members, and the results showed something virtually unprecedented: a one-year decline of 10 percentage points in the number of military personnel identifying themselves as Republicans. In the 2004 poll, the percentage of military respondents who characterized themselves as Republicans stood at 60%. By the end of 2005, that had dropped to 56%. And by the end of 2006, the percentage of military Republicans plummeted to 46%.
The drop in Republican Party identification among active-duty personnel is a sharp reversal of a 30-year trend toward the "Republicanization" of the U.S. military, and it could mark a sea change in the nature of the military — and the nature of public debates about national security issues.
For most of U.S. history, issues of national security rarely divided Americans along sharp party lines: The old adage that "politics ends at the water's edge" generally held true. The military, while institutionally conservative with a small "c," was not closely identified with a particular political party. But somewhere between the end of the Vietnam War and the middle of the Clinton era, the U.S. military began to look like a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Republican Party.
The rightward shift was dramatic: In 1976, 25% of civilians characterized themselves as Republicans, while 33% of military officers were Republicans — a military-civilian "gap" of only 8%. By 1996, the military-civilian gap on party affiliation had grown to 33%; while 34% of civilians self-identified as Republicans, so did a whopping 70% of military officers.
In Britain, the Anglican Church used to be snidely described as "the Tory Party at Prayer." In the United States over the last 30 years, the military became, to a significant extent, the Republican Party at War.
(More ... Los Angeles Times > Opinion > Op Ed)
Labels: LATimes, Opinion, U.S. Military
¶ 19:48 0 comments
White House, Secret Service Agreed to Designate Visitor Records as Non-public (USAToday.com)
Posted 1/5/2007 5:44 PM ET
By Pete Yost, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The White House and the Secret Service quietly signed an agreement last spring in the midst of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal declaring that records identifying visitors to the White House complex are not subject to public disclosure.
The Bush administration didn't reveal the existence of the memorandum of understanding until last fall. The White House is using it to deal with a legal problem on a separate front, a ruling by a federal judge ordering the production of Secret Service logs identifying visitors to the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
In a federal appeals court filing three weeks ago, the administration's lawyers used the memo in a legal argument aimed at overturning the judge's ruling. The Washington Post is suing for access to the Secret Service logs.
The five-page document dated May 17 declares that all entry and exit data on White House visitors belongs to the White House as presidential records rather than to the Secret Service as agency records. Therefore, the agreement states, the material is not subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
In the past, Secret Service logs have revealed the comings and goings of various White House visitors, including Monica Lewinsky and Clinton campaign donor Denise Rich, the wife of fugitive financier Marc Rich, who received a pardon in the closing hours of the Clinton administration.
(More ... USA Today > Washington/Politics) ¶ 16:44 0 comments
By Pete Yost, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The White House and the Secret Service quietly signed an agreement last spring in the midst of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal declaring that records identifying visitors to the White House complex are not subject to public disclosure.
The Bush administration didn't reveal the existence of the memorandum of understanding until last fall. The White House is using it to deal with a legal problem on a separate front, a ruling by a federal judge ordering the production of Secret Service logs identifying visitors to the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
In a federal appeals court filing three weeks ago, the administration's lawyers used the memo in a legal argument aimed at overturning the judge's ruling. The Washington Post is suing for access to the Secret Service logs.
The five-page document dated May 17 declares that all entry and exit data on White House visitors belongs to the White House as presidential records rather than to the Secret Service as agency records. Therefore, the agreement states, the material is not subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
In the past, Secret Service logs have revealed the comings and goings of various White House visitors, including Monica Lewinsky and Clinton campaign donor Denise Rich, the wife of fugitive financier Marc Rich, who received a pardon in the closing hours of the Clinton administration.
(More ... USA Today > Washington/Politics) ¶ 16:44 0 comments
Bush Warned About Mail-Opening Authority (WashingtonPost.com)
Recent 'Signing Statement' Seen as Stretching Law
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 5, 2007; Page A03
President Bush signed a little-noticed statement last month asserting the authority to open U.S. mail without judicial warrants in emergencies or foreign intelligence cases, prompting warnings yesterday from Democrats and privacy advocates that the administration is attempting to circumvent legal restrictions on its powers.
A "signing statement" attached to a postal reform bill on Dec. 20 says the Bush administration "shall construe" a section of that law to allow the opening of sealed mail to protect life, guard against hazardous materials or conduct "physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
White House and U.S. Postal Service officials said the statement was not intended to expand the powers of the executive branch but merely to clarify existing ones for extreme cases.
"This is not a change in law, this is not new, it is not . . . a sweeping new power by the president," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters. "It is, in fact, merely a statement of present law and present authorities granted to the president of the United States."
But some civil liberties and national-security law experts said the statement's language is unduly vague and appears to go beyond long-recognized limits on the ability of the government to open letters and other U.S. mail without approval from a judge.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 5, 2007; Page A03
President Bush signed a little-noticed statement last month asserting the authority to open U.S. mail without judicial warrants in emergencies or foreign intelligence cases, prompting warnings yesterday from Democrats and privacy advocates that the administration is attempting to circumvent legal restrictions on its powers.
A "signing statement" attached to a postal reform bill on Dec. 20 says the Bush administration "shall construe" a section of that law to allow the opening of sealed mail to protect life, guard against hazardous materials or conduct "physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."
White House and U.S. Postal Service officials said the statement was not intended to expand the powers of the executive branch but merely to clarify existing ones for extreme cases.
"This is not a change in law, this is not new, it is not . . . a sweeping new power by the president," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters. "It is, in fact, merely a statement of present law and present authorities granted to the president of the United States."
But some civil liberties and national-security law experts said the statement's language is unduly vague and appears to go beyond long-recognized limits on the ability of the government to open letters and other U.S. mail without approval from a judge.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics)
Labels: Bush, Civil Liberties, Washington Post
¶ 16:37 0 comments
Ethanol's Success Story May Have Downside (Boston.com)
As more corn is needed, food costs may rise
By John Donnelly, Globe Staff | January 5, 2007
WASHINGTON -- US factories producing ethanol fuel for cars may consume as much as half of the country's corn crop next year -- more than double earlier government predictions -- creating competition for grain stocks that could drive up supermarket prices for cereals, meat, eggs, and dairy products, according to a report released yesterday.
"The world needs a strategy to deal with this unfolding competition between automobiles and people for the grain supply," said Lester R. Brown , president of the Earth Policy Institute , a Washington- based advocacy organization that wrote the report. Brown called for a moratorium of ethanol plants in the United States "so we can catch our breath and determine how much we want to harvest our corn for ethanol."
Democrats in Congress are expected in the next two weeks to begin a major push for alternative energy, including ethanol, as a way of reducing the country's reliance on foreign oil.
Ethanol plants use corn to create a synthetic form of oil. Feedlot owners, who intensely feed corn to cattle and pigs for four to six months before slaughter, have seen their costs rise dramatically because of ethanol production. The growing competition for corn is expected to create price hikes that will be passed on to consumers who buy anything from milk to pork chops, Brown said.
Ethanol production doubled from 2001 to 2005, and the report said it could double again by 2008 to more than 15 billion gallons, or roughly 6 percent of US auto fuel needs.
(More ... Boston Globe > News > Nation > Washington)
By John Donnelly, Globe Staff | January 5, 2007
WASHINGTON -- US factories producing ethanol fuel for cars may consume as much as half of the country's corn crop next year -- more than double earlier government predictions -- creating competition for grain stocks that could drive up supermarket prices for cereals, meat, eggs, and dairy products, according to a report released yesterday.
"The world needs a strategy to deal with this unfolding competition between automobiles and people for the grain supply," said Lester R. Brown , president of the Earth Policy Institute , a Washington- based advocacy organization that wrote the report. Brown called for a moratorium of ethanol plants in the United States "so we can catch our breath and determine how much we want to harvest our corn for ethanol."
Democrats in Congress are expected in the next two weeks to begin a major push for alternative energy, including ethanol, as a way of reducing the country's reliance on foreign oil.
Ethanol plants use corn to create a synthetic form of oil. Feedlot owners, who intensely feed corn to cattle and pigs for four to six months before slaughter, have seen their costs rise dramatically because of ethanol production. The growing competition for corn is expected to create price hikes that will be passed on to consumers who buy anything from milk to pork chops, Brown said.
Ethanol production doubled from 2001 to 2005, and the report said it could double again by 2008 to more than 15 billion gallons, or roughly 6 percent of US auto fuel needs.
(More ... Boston Globe > News > Nation > Washington)
Labels: Boston Globe, Congress, Energy
¶ 16:34 0 comments
1.04.2007
Deep in Le Carré Country, the Remote Polish Airport at Heart of CIA Flights Row (Guardina.co.uk)
Former director tells how planes were met by vehicles from nearby military base
Nicholas Watt in Szymany
Thursday January 4, 2007
The Guardian
Tucked away at the end of a pot-holed country lane which runs through a dense forest, Szymany airport would be the perfect setting for a John Le Carré novel. A shabby control tower looks out over a long runway which appears slightly out of place next to a modest terminal building.
Until last year, when it was mothballed in a row over funding, the former Warsaw Pact military airbase enjoyed a brief renaissance as a regional airport for tourists visiting the picturesque Warminsko Mazurskie area of north-eastern Poland. German tourists on hunting trips, or sailors holidaying on the nearby lakes, were the typical passengers who flew into Szymany on small propeller planes.
But the tranquillity of the airport, which is now disturbed by no more than the sound of migratory birds heading for the lakes, belies its place at the centre of an international row about CIA "rendition flights" of terror suspects. Human rights activists and MEPs investigating the flights have long suspected that many detainees passed through Szymany airport on their way to a secret US detention centre at the nearby Stare Kiejkuty military base.
These suspicions were recently hardened when the airport's former director confirmed that numerous alleged CIA flights touched down at Szymany, where they were met by military vehicles from Stare Kiejkuty. The evidence from Mariola Przewlocka, who was sacked from her job last year for "political reasons", prompted MEPs to make the first official claim that terror suspects may have been detained on EU soil.
(More ... Gyardian Unlimited > Politics > Special Reports)
Nicholas Watt in Szymany
Thursday January 4, 2007
The Guardian
Tucked away at the end of a pot-holed country lane which runs through a dense forest, Szymany airport would be the perfect setting for a John Le Carré novel. A shabby control tower looks out over a long runway which appears slightly out of place next to a modest terminal building.
Until last year, when it was mothballed in a row over funding, the former Warsaw Pact military airbase enjoyed a brief renaissance as a regional airport for tourists visiting the picturesque Warminsko Mazurskie area of north-eastern Poland. German tourists on hunting trips, or sailors holidaying on the nearby lakes, were the typical passengers who flew into Szymany on small propeller planes.
But the tranquillity of the airport, which is now disturbed by no more than the sound of migratory birds heading for the lakes, belies its place at the centre of an international row about CIA "rendition flights" of terror suspects. Human rights activists and MEPs investigating the flights have long suspected that many detainees passed through Szymany airport on their way to a secret US detention centre at the nearby Stare Kiejkuty military base.
These suspicions were recently hardened when the airport's former director confirmed that numerous alleged CIA flights touched down at Szymany, where they were met by military vehicles from Stare Kiejkuty. The evidence from Mariola Przewlocka, who was sacked from her job last year for "political reasons", prompted MEPs to make the first official claim that terror suspects may have been detained on EU soil.
(More ... Gyardian Unlimited > Politics > Special Reports)
Labels: CIA, Extraordinary Rendition, Guardian
¶ 22:53 0 comments
Democrats Hope to Take From Oil, Give To Green Energy (WashingtonPost.com)
By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 4, 2007; Page A01
House Democrats are crafting an energy package that would roll back billions of dollars worth of oil drilling incentives, raise billions more by boosting federal royalties paid by oil and gas companies for offshore production, and plow the money into new tax breaks for renewable energy sources, congressional sources said yesterday.
Eager to paint themselves as different from the Bush administration and the past Republican majority, Democratic leaders are targeting a manufacturing tax cut in 2004 that they say gave unneeded incentives to the oil industry, Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland said in a briefing yesterday. Hoyer said Democrats are also planning to force oil companies to pay royalties on deepwater Gulf of Mexico tracts leased in 1998 and 1999; the Interior Department has said that the leases inadvertently failed to include provisions for royalty payments once oil prices rose above certain thresholds.
The repeal of the 2004 tax cuts for the oil and gas industry would generate nearly $5 billion, Democratic lawmakers said, quoting estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. The royalty payments would yield between $9 billion and $11 billion, Hoyer said.
But energy industry and congressional sources said that the details of the package remain in flux, in part because of disagreements among Democrats over how the revenue would be used and whether to also roll back oil and gas industry incentives in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was supported by many Democrats.
Democratic leaders said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would introduce the energy package on Jan. 18, toward the end of the "100 hours" of legislative initiatives.
(More ... Washington Post > Business > Special Reports > Oil & Gas Prices)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 4, 2007; Page A01
House Democrats are crafting an energy package that would roll back billions of dollars worth of oil drilling incentives, raise billions more by boosting federal royalties paid by oil and gas companies for offshore production, and plow the money into new tax breaks for renewable energy sources, congressional sources said yesterday.
Eager to paint themselves as different from the Bush administration and the past Republican majority, Democratic leaders are targeting a manufacturing tax cut in 2004 that they say gave unneeded incentives to the oil industry, Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland said in a briefing yesterday. Hoyer said Democrats are also planning to force oil companies to pay royalties on deepwater Gulf of Mexico tracts leased in 1998 and 1999; the Interior Department has said that the leases inadvertently failed to include provisions for royalty payments once oil prices rose above certain thresholds.
The repeal of the 2004 tax cuts for the oil and gas industry would generate nearly $5 billion, Democratic lawmakers said, quoting estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation. The royalty payments would yield between $9 billion and $11 billion, Hoyer said.
But energy industry and congressional sources said that the details of the package remain in flux, in part because of disagreements among Democrats over how the revenue would be used and whether to also roll back oil and gas industry incentives in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was supported by many Democrats.
Democratic leaders said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would introduce the energy package on Jan. 18, toward the end of the "100 hours" of legislative initiatives.
(More ... Washington Post > Business > Special Reports > Oil & Gas Prices)
Labels: Energy, Washington Post
¶ 22:49 0 comments
U.S. Bars Lab From Testing Electronic Voting (NYTimes.com)
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: January 4, 2007
A laboratory that has tested most of the nation’s electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests.
Skip to next paragraph
The company, Ciber Inc. of Greenwood Village, Colo., has also come under fire from analysts hired by New York State over its plans to test new voting machines for the state. New York could eventually spend $200 million to replace its aging lever devices.
Experts on voting systems say the Ciber problems underscore longstanding worries about lax inspections in the secretive world of voting-machine testing. The action by the federal Election Assistance Commission seems certain to fan growing concerns about the reliability and security of the devices.
The commission acted last summer, but the problem was not disclosed then. Officials at the commission and Ciber confirmed the action in recent interviews.
Ciber, the largest tester of the nation’s voting machine software, says it is fixing its problems and expects to gain certification soon.
Experts say the deficiencies of the laboratory suggest that crucial features like the vote-counting software and security against hacking may not have been thoroughly tested on many machines now in use.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Published: January 4, 2007
A laboratory that has tested most of the nation’s electronic voting systems has been temporarily barred from approving new machines after federal officials found that it was not following its quality-control procedures and could not document that it was conducting all the required tests.
Skip to next paragraph
The company, Ciber Inc. of Greenwood Village, Colo., has also come under fire from analysts hired by New York State over its plans to test new voting machines for the state. New York could eventually spend $200 million to replace its aging lever devices.
Experts on voting systems say the Ciber problems underscore longstanding worries about lax inspections in the secretive world of voting-machine testing. The action by the federal Election Assistance Commission seems certain to fan growing concerns about the reliability and security of the devices.
The commission acted last summer, but the problem was not disclosed then. Officials at the commission and Ciber confirmed the action in recent interviews.
Ciber, the largest tester of the nation’s voting machine software, says it is fixing its problems and expects to gain certification soon.
Experts say the deficiencies of the laboratory suggest that crucial features like the vote-counting software and security against hacking may not have been thoroughly tested on many machines now in use.
(More ... New York Times > Washington)
Labels: blackbox voting, New York Times
¶ 22:46 0 comments
Congressman to Take Oath on Jefferson's Quran (CNN.com)
POSTED: 7:27 p.m. EST, January 3, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will use a Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson during his ceremonial swearing-in Thursday.
The chief of the Library of Congress' rare book and special collections division, Mark Dimunation, will walk the Quran across the street to the Capitol and then walk it back after the ceremony.
Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, contacted the library about the book last month, Dimunation said.
Some critics have argued that only a Bible should be used for the swearing-in. Last month, Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil Goode warned that unless immigration is tightened, "many more Muslims" will be elected and follow Ellison's lead. (Full story)
Ellison was born in Detroit, Michigan, and converted to Islam in college.
Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert said the new congressman "wants this to be a special day, and using Thomas Jefferson's Quran makes it even more special."
"Jefferson's Quran dates religious tolerance to the founders of our country," he added.
An English translation of the Arabic, it was published in 1764 in London, a later printing of one originally published in 1734.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 22:43 0 comments
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will use a Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson during his ceremonial swearing-in Thursday.
The chief of the Library of Congress' rare book and special collections division, Mark Dimunation, will walk the Quran across the street to the Capitol and then walk it back after the ceremony.
Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, contacted the library about the book last month, Dimunation said.
Some critics have argued that only a Bible should be used for the swearing-in. Last month, Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil Goode warned that unless immigration is tightened, "many more Muslims" will be elected and follow Ellison's lead. (Full story)
Ellison was born in Detroit, Michigan, and converted to Islam in college.
Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert said the new congressman "wants this to be a special day, and using Thomas Jefferson's Quran makes it even more special."
"Jefferson's Quran dates religious tolerance to the founders of our country," he added.
An English translation of the Arabic, it was published in 1764 in London, a later printing of one originally published in 1734.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 22:43 0 comments
1.03.2007
Democrats to Go on Offensive as New Congress Convenes (Guardian.co.uk)
· Bush faces questioning over additional troops
· Battles loom on stem cell research and war finance
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Wednesday January 3, 2007
The Guardian
President George Bush, who for nearly four years had a free hand in decision-making over the war in Iraq, faces a series of concerted challenges starting from tomorrow from a newly installed and assertive Democratic Congress.
In a much-anticipated speech, Mr Bush is expected to reveal his new strategy on the war as early as next week, amid widespread speculation that he intends to bolster the US presence in Iraq in the short term by an additional 30,000 troops.
That troop "surge" and a White House request for an additional $100bn (£51bn) to pay for the war this year are expected to encounter strong opposition from a previously supportive Congress.
To add to Mr Bush's challenges, following the Democratic capture of Congress in last November's mid-term elections, the incoming Democratic speaker, Nancy Pelosi, who is to be sworn in tomorrow, has announced her determination to push through half a dozen pieces of legislation during the first 100 hours of Congress's assembly. On Ms Pelosi's agenda are issues that have been anathema to the Bush White House, such as an increase in the federal minimum wage and federal funding for stem cell research.
But it is regarding policy on Iraq where Mr Bush could face his most bruising battles from Democrats, as well as moderate Republicans who have grown increasingly skittish about the prospect of fighting the 2008 elections in the shadow of a historically unpopular president and the war in Iraq. Now they have a share of power in Congress, Democrats too are reluctant to be saddled with responsibility for the war.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > USA)
· Battles loom on stem cell research and war finance
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Wednesday January 3, 2007
The Guardian
President George Bush, who for nearly four years had a free hand in decision-making over the war in Iraq, faces a series of concerted challenges starting from tomorrow from a newly installed and assertive Democratic Congress.
In a much-anticipated speech, Mr Bush is expected to reveal his new strategy on the war as early as next week, amid widespread speculation that he intends to bolster the US presence in Iraq in the short term by an additional 30,000 troops.
That troop "surge" and a White House request for an additional $100bn (£51bn) to pay for the war this year are expected to encounter strong opposition from a previously supportive Congress.
To add to Mr Bush's challenges, following the Democratic capture of Congress in last November's mid-term elections, the incoming Democratic speaker, Nancy Pelosi, who is to be sworn in tomorrow, has announced her determination to push through half a dozen pieces of legislation during the first 100 hours of Congress's assembly. On Ms Pelosi's agenda are issues that have been anathema to the Bush White House, such as an increase in the federal minimum wage and federal funding for stem cell research.
But it is regarding policy on Iraq where Mr Bush could face his most bruising battles from Democrats, as well as moderate Republicans who have grown increasingly skittish about the prospect of fighting the 2008 elections in the shadow of a historically unpopular president and the war in Iraq. Now they have a share of power in Congress, Democrats too are reluctant to be saddled with responsibility for the war.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited > Special Report > USA)
Labels: Bush, Congress, Guardian, Pelosi
¶ 18:06 0 comments
U.S. Seeks Kiwi's Advice on Predicting Iraq Attacks (NZHerald.co.nz)
Wednesday January 03, 2007
By Martin Johnston
A New Zealand academic who has challenged a widely quoted estimate of the death toll in Iraq has been invited to go to Washington and advise the United States military on ways of predicting attacks.
Dr Sean Gourley, 27, a research fellow at Oxford University in Britain, created a stir in scientific circles when he and a colleague dismissed a claim by other researchers that the American-led invasion of Iraq had led to the deaths of nearly 655,000 Iraqis.
That figure is at least 10 times higher than estimates from Iraq's Government and US authorities.
Dr Gourley and his colleague Professor Neil Johnson believe the figure is 218,000 Iraqi deaths.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > National News)
By Martin Johnston
A New Zealand academic who has challenged a widely quoted estimate of the death toll in Iraq has been invited to go to Washington and advise the United States military on ways of predicting attacks.
Dr Sean Gourley, 27, a research fellow at Oxford University in Britain, created a stir in scientific circles when he and a colleague dismissed a claim by other researchers that the American-led invasion of Iraq had led to the deaths of nearly 655,000 Iraqis.
That figure is at least 10 times higher than estimates from Iraq's Government and US authorities.
Dr Gourley and his colleague Professor Neil Johnson believe the figure is 218,000 Iraqi deaths.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > National News)
Labels: Iraq, New Zealand Herald
¶ 08:58 0 comments
1.02.2007
McDade Condemns Hicks's Legal Treatment (ABC.net.au)
Tuesday, January 2, 2007. 10:43am (AEDT)
Australia's first director of military prosecutions says she is appalled at the legal treatment of Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks.
Brigadier Lynette McDade is due to move to Canberra from her home in the Northern Territory in the next few weeks.
There she will establish her office in the run up to Australia's first permanent military court.
She says her independence is key to her position and says no one, including the top military brass, should be offended by her calling for justice for Mr Hicks - who has been held at Guantanamo Bay for more than five years.
"It is too long. Nobody should be held without trial in custody for that long, nobody, and if we did that you can imagine the hue and cry," she said.
"Whether it's David Hicks or anybody else, I don't believe anyone should be disentitled to a fair and quick trial.
"If you are accused, allegations are made against you in relation to the commission to any type of offending.
"As far as I'm concerned you should be brought to trial as quickly as possible."
Mr Hicks's father, Terry Hicks, has welcomed Brigadier McDade's comments.
But he fears it will have little effect.
(More ... ABC > News)
Australia's first director of military prosecutions says she is appalled at the legal treatment of Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks.
Brigadier Lynette McDade is due to move to Canberra from her home in the Northern Territory in the next few weeks.
There she will establish her office in the run up to Australia's first permanent military court.
She says her independence is key to her position and says no one, including the top military brass, should be offended by her calling for justice for Mr Hicks - who has been held at Guantanamo Bay for more than five years.
"It is too long. Nobody should be held without trial in custody for that long, nobody, and if we did that you can imagine the hue and cry," she said.
"Whether it's David Hicks or anybody else, I don't believe anyone should be disentitled to a fair and quick trial.
"If you are accused, allegations are made against you in relation to the commission to any type of offending.
"As far as I'm concerned you should be brought to trial as quickly as possible."
Mr Hicks's father, Terry Hicks, has welcomed Brigadier McDade's comments.
But he fears it will have little effect.
(More ... ABC > News)
Labels: ABC (Aus), Guantanamo
¶ 14:16 0 comments
Edwards terms Iraq surge "McCain doctrine" (Reuters.com)
Mon Jan 1, 2007 3:08am ET
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards, targeting a potential Republican rival in 2008, dubbed plans for a short-term U.S. troop increase in Iraq "the McCain doctrine," in an interview aired on Sunday.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona, considered likely to be a Republican candidate for president, has been "the most prominent spokesperson for this for some time," Edwards said in an early salvo of the 2008 campaign.
Edwards, a former senator who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004, made his remarks in an interview on the ABC News program "This Week."
Photo
The top news, photos, and videos of 2006. Full Coverage
"I actually, myself, believe that this idea of surging troops, escalating the war -- what Senator McCain has been talking about -- what I would call now the McCain doctrine ... (is) dead wrong," said Edwards.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards, targeting a potential Republican rival in 2008, dubbed plans for a short-term U.S. troop increase in Iraq "the McCain doctrine," in an interview aired on Sunday.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona, considered likely to be a Republican candidate for president, has been "the most prominent spokesperson for this for some time," Edwards said in an early salvo of the 2008 campaign.
Edwards, a former senator who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004, made his remarks in an interview on the ABC News program "This Week."
Photo
The top news, photos, and videos of 2006. Full Coverage
"I actually, myself, believe that this idea of surging troops, escalating the war -- what Senator McCain has been talking about -- what I would call now the McCain doctrine ... (is) dead wrong," said Edwards.
(More ... Reuters > News > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, Edwards, Iraq, McCain, Reuters
¶ 14:08 0 comments
Clinton-Obama Differences Clear in Senate Votes (WashingtonPost.com)
Records Can Be Baggage In Bids for White House
By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 1, 2007; Page A01
The attack ads practically write themselves: Hillary Clinton voted against ethanol! Barack Obama wants to increase taxes!
Such are the perils of running for president as a senator. The two front-runners for the 2008 Democratic nomination are newcomers to the chamber. But in the two years that Clinton and Obama have overlapped, they have taken opposite sides at least 40 times. That's a lot of material to mine, and even misrepresent.
Of the eight senators pondering presidential runs, Clinton (N.Y.), who is completing her first Senate term, and Obama (Ill.), sworn in two years ago, have the briefest voting histories. The Senate has held 645 roll-call votes during their shared tenure, and more than 90 percent of the time the two senators stood with other Democrats. They opposed John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination as chief justice, supported increased funding for embryonic stem cell research and backed the same nonbinding measure that urged President Bush to plan for a gradual troop withdrawal from Iraq.
But other votes reveal important differences between the Democratic rivals that distinguish them as they prepare to launch their anticipated candidacies. The areas of dispute include energy policy, congressional ethics and budget priorities, relations with Cuba, gun ownership, and whether a senator can hold a second job.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics > In Congress)
By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 1, 2007; Page A01
The attack ads practically write themselves: Hillary Clinton voted against ethanol! Barack Obama wants to increase taxes!
Such are the perils of running for president as a senator. The two front-runners for the 2008 Democratic nomination are newcomers to the chamber. But in the two years that Clinton and Obama have overlapped, they have taken opposite sides at least 40 times. That's a lot of material to mine, and even misrepresent.
Of the eight senators pondering presidential runs, Clinton (N.Y.), who is completing her first Senate term, and Obama (Ill.), sworn in two years ago, have the briefest voting histories. The Senate has held 645 roll-call votes during their shared tenure, and more than 90 percent of the time the two senators stood with other Democrats. They opposed John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination as chief justice, supported increased funding for embryonic stem cell research and backed the same nonbinding measure that urged President Bush to plan for a gradual troop withdrawal from Iraq.
But other votes reveal important differences between the Democratic rivals that distinguish them as they prepare to launch their anticipated candidacies. The areas of dispute include energy policy, congressional ethics and budget priorities, relations with Cuba, gun ownership, and whether a senator can hold a second job.
(More ... Washington Post > Politics > In Congress)
Labels: 2008 election, Clinton, Obama, Washington Post
¶ 13:58 1 comments
Middle Stance Emerges in Debate Over Climate (NYTimes.com)
(More ... New York Times > Science > Environment)
Amid the shouting lately about whether global warming is a human-caused catastrophe or a hoax, some usually staid climate scientists in the usually invisible middle are speaking up.
The discourse over the issue has been feverish since Hurricane Katrina. Seizing the moment, many environmental campaigners, former Vice President Al Gore and some scientists have portrayed the growing human influence on the climate as an unfolding disaster that is already measurably strengthening hurricanes, spreading diseases and amplifying recent droughts and deluges.
Conservative politicians and a few scientists, many with ties to energy companies, have variously countered that human-driven warming is inconsequential, unproved or a manufactured crisis.
A third stance is now emerging, espoused by many experts who challenge both poles of the debate.
They agree that accumulating carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping smokestack and tailpipe gases probably pose a momentous environmental challenge, but say the appropriate response is more akin to buying fire insurance and installing sprinklers and new wiring in an old, irreplaceable house (the home planet) than to fighting a fire already raging.
“Climate change presents a very real risk,” said Carl Wunsch, a climate and oceans expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It seems worth a very large premium to insure ourselves against the most catastrophic scenarios. Denying the risk seems utterly stupid. Claiming we can calculate the probabilities with any degree of skill seems equally stupid.”
Many in this camp seek a policy of reducing vulnerability to all climate extremes while building public support for a sustained shift to nonpolluting energy sources.
(More ... New York Times > Science > Environment)
Labels: Climate Change, New York Times
¶ 13:48 0 comments
