Democrats Abroad New Zealand
4.28.2007
Debate Scorecard: They're No Jack Kennedys (NYObserver.com)
Barack Obama and John Edwards may have squandered their first opportunity to make headway against the notoriously scripted Hillary Clinton. But it's early yet.
By Steve Kornacki Published: April 26, 2007
Next February 5, when approximately 83 states are scheduled to hold primaries and caucuses that cumulatively figure to determine the party’s presidential nominee, chances are no one will remember anything from the lead-off Democratic debate.
There were no sharp attacks, no memorable exchanges, no gotcha moments. No one was asked about the hypothetical rape and murder of Kitty Dukakis; no one accidentally declared Poland liberated; and no one foolishly compared him or herself to Jack Kennedy.
The closest any candidate came to eloquence was when Mike Gravel randomly offered up an excerpt of Ronald Reagan’s 1984 put-down of Walter Mondale, saying that he wouldn’t hold his opponents’ youth and inexperience against them.
No one really won this debate. Which makes it a default victory for Hillary Clinton, the only Democrat who stands to win simply by not losing.
Hillary’s performance itself was serviceable, the equivalent of a quarterback completing 13 of 25 passes for 170 yards and a touchdown. She likely benefited from lowered expectations, after months -- if not years -- of critical attacks on her supposedly tight, frigid and over-scripted public personality.
(More ... New York Observer > Politics)
By Steve Kornacki Published: April 26, 2007
Next February 5, when approximately 83 states are scheduled to hold primaries and caucuses that cumulatively figure to determine the party’s presidential nominee, chances are no one will remember anything from the lead-off Democratic debate.
There were no sharp attacks, no memorable exchanges, no gotcha moments. No one was asked about the hypothetical rape and murder of Kitty Dukakis; no one accidentally declared Poland liberated; and no one foolishly compared him or herself to Jack Kennedy.
The closest any candidate came to eloquence was when Mike Gravel randomly offered up an excerpt of Ronald Reagan’s 1984 put-down of Walter Mondale, saying that he wouldn’t hold his opponents’ youth and inexperience against them.
No one really won this debate. Which makes it a default victory for Hillary Clinton, the only Democrat who stands to win simply by not losing.
Hillary’s performance itself was serviceable, the equivalent of a quarterback completing 13 of 25 passes for 170 yards and a touchdown. She likely benefited from lowered expectations, after months -- if not years -- of critical attacks on her supposedly tight, frigid and over-scripted public personality.
(More ... New York Observer > Politics)
Labels: 2008 election, New York Observer
¶ 13:43 0 comments
4.12.2007
Bush Looks to Appoint a War 'Czar'(NZHerald.co.nz)
5:00AM Thursday April 12, 2007
WASHINGTON - The White House wants to appoint a high-profile overseer to manage the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but has had trouble finding someone to take the job, the Washington Post reported.
At least three retired four-star generals approached by the White House in recent weeks have turned down the position. The war "czar" would report directly to United States President George W. Bush and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and would have authority to issue directions to the Pentagon and the State Department.
Retired Marine General John "Jack" Sheehan, a former top Nato commander, was among those who rejected the job. "The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going," Sheehan told the Post. He said he believes that Vice-President Dick Cheney and his hawkish allies remain more powerful within the Administration than pragmatists looking for a way out of Iraq.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > World) ¶ 08:49 0 comments
WASHINGTON - The White House wants to appoint a high-profile overseer to manage the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but has had trouble finding someone to take the job, the Washington Post reported.
At least three retired four-star generals approached by the White House in recent weeks have turned down the position. The war "czar" would report directly to United States President George W. Bush and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and would have authority to issue directions to the Pentagon and the State Department.
Retired Marine General John "Jack" Sheehan, a former top Nato commander, was among those who rejected the job. "The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going," Sheehan told the Post. He said he believes that Vice-President Dick Cheney and his hawkish allies remain more powerful within the Administration than pragmatists looking for a way out of Iraq.
(More ... New Zealand Herald > World) ¶ 08:49 0 comments
4.10.2007
White House Unofficial E-mail Accounts Draw Scrutiny (CNN.com)
POSTED: 11:48 p.m. EDT, April 9, 2007
From Bob Franken
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is being accused of improperly trying to hide e-mails about government business by using unofficial e-mail accounts.
Congressional investigators say they found communications on one account from top White House aides about official matters, like the December firings of eight U.S. attorneys.
Those e-mails were discovered on a Republican National Committee e-mail domain called gwb43.com. That domain is not part of the official White House communication system.
The Presidential Records Act, passed during the Nixon administration, requires the preservation of all official records of and about the president.
A White House spokesman defended the use of outside e-mail accounts as an appropriate method of separating official business from political campaign work.
But the use of those accounts by officials discussing the firings -- and one from now-imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff -- have led a liberal watchdog group to accuse administration of trying to skirt the law governing preservation of presidential records.
"They wanted to make sure that no record could ever be found of what they were really up to in the White House," Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told CNN.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 22:10 0 comments
From Bob Franken
CNN Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House is being accused of improperly trying to hide e-mails about government business by using unofficial e-mail accounts.
Congressional investigators say they found communications on one account from top White House aides about official matters, like the December firings of eight U.S. attorneys.
Those e-mails were discovered on a Republican National Committee e-mail domain called gwb43.com. That domain is not part of the official White House communication system.
The Presidential Records Act, passed during the Nixon administration, requires the preservation of all official records of and about the president.
A White House spokesman defended the use of outside e-mail accounts as an appropriate method of separating official business from political campaign work.
But the use of those accounts by officials discussing the firings -- and one from now-imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff -- have led a liberal watchdog group to accuse administration of trying to skirt the law governing preservation of presidential records.
"They wanted to make sure that no record could ever be found of what they were really up to in the White House," Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told CNN.
(More ... CNN > Politics) ¶ 22:10 0 comments
Obama Not in 2008 Race for Second Place (Reuters.com)
Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:10AM EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama on Tuesday dismissed the notion he might consider accepting the No. 2 spot on the 2008 ballot -- with Hillary Rodham Clinton at the top.
"You don't run for second. I don't believe in that," the Illinois Senator said on the talk show "Late Night with David Letterman."
"That would be a powerful ticket," Letterman prodded.
"Which order are we talking?" Obama replied, drawing laughter and applause from the studio audience.
"Let's say you're the presidential candidate and Hillary is the vice presidential candidate. Now if she were sitting here, it would be different from that," Letterman joked.
Obama, a fresh face on the national stage who has served just two years in the U.S. Senate, said last week he had raised $25 million this year, almost matching Clinton and solidifying his bid for the Democratic nomination to seek the presidency in November 2008.
Obama fell only $1 million short of the higher-profile New York senator, despite the huge fund-raising network she developed through her Senate campaigns and the White House races of her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Asked by Letterman whether there were private discussions of the situation going the other way, with Clinton in the No. 2 spot, Obama said the contenders were all in the race to win the party nomination but were on the same team.
(More ... Reuters > News)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama on Tuesday dismissed the notion he might consider accepting the No. 2 spot on the 2008 ballot -- with Hillary Rodham Clinton at the top.
"You don't run for second. I don't believe in that," the Illinois Senator said on the talk show "Late Night with David Letterman."
"That would be a powerful ticket," Letterman prodded.
"Which order are we talking?" Obama replied, drawing laughter and applause from the studio audience.
"Let's say you're the presidential candidate and Hillary is the vice presidential candidate. Now if she were sitting here, it would be different from that," Letterman joked.
Obama, a fresh face on the national stage who has served just two years in the U.S. Senate, said last week he had raised $25 million this year, almost matching Clinton and solidifying his bid for the Democratic nomination to seek the presidency in November 2008.
Obama fell only $1 million short of the higher-profile New York senator, despite the huge fund-raising network she developed through her Senate campaigns and the White House races of her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Asked by Letterman whether there were private discussions of the situation going the other way, with Clinton in the No. 2 spot, Obama said the contenders were all in the race to win the party nomination but were on the same team.
(More ... Reuters > News)
Labels: 2008 election, Obama, Reuters
¶ 22:00 0 comments
4.07.2007
Cheney Still Insists al-Qa'ida Had Links With Iraq, Despite Evidence (Independent.co.uk)
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 07 April 2007
Vice-President Dick Cheney continues to insist that al-Qa'ida had close ties with Iraq before the 2003 US-led invasion, despite the publication of further evidence, including the interrogation of Saddam Hussein, confirming the consensus to the contrary of US intelligence.
Mr Cheney's assertions came as Congress released the full declassified version of a Pentagon report that sharply criticises a special office in its own building for writing intelligence reports alleging such contacts.
Those claims flatly contradicted the considered judgement of other US agencies - including the CIA and the Defence Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's official in-house intelligence unit - that no such links existed.
The new report, whose broad conclusions were released earlier this year, gives the clearest picture yet of how Bush administration hawks manipulated intelligence to advance the case that Saddam was working with al-Qa'ida.
Before the invasion, President Bush and Mr Cheney fostered that impression in speech after speech - so successfully that at one point, polls showed, two-thirds of Americans believed the Iraqi dictator had a hand in the attacks of 11 September.
(More ... Independent > News > World > Americas)
Published: 07 April 2007
Vice-President Dick Cheney continues to insist that al-Qa'ida had close ties with Iraq before the 2003 US-led invasion, despite the publication of further evidence, including the interrogation of Saddam Hussein, confirming the consensus to the contrary of US intelligence.
Mr Cheney's assertions came as Congress released the full declassified version of a Pentagon report that sharply criticises a special office in its own building for writing intelligence reports alleging such contacts.
Those claims flatly contradicted the considered judgement of other US agencies - including the CIA and the Defence Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's official in-house intelligence unit - that no such links existed.
The new report, whose broad conclusions were released earlier this year, gives the clearest picture yet of how Bush administration hawks manipulated intelligence to advance the case that Saddam was working with al-Qa'ida.
Before the invasion, President Bush and Mr Cheney fostered that impression in speech after speech - so successfully that at one point, polls showed, two-thirds of Americans believed the Iraqi dictator had a hand in the attacks of 11 September.
(More ... Independent > News > World > Americas)
Labels: al-Qaeda, Cheney, CIA, Independent, Iraq
¶ 14:14 0 comments
Scientists Walk Out in Protest at China's Intransigence (Indpendent.co.uk)
By Stephen Castle in Brussels
Published: 07 April 2007
Some of the world's best-informed climate change scientists walked out of an all-night drafting session of yesterday's report on global warming, as tempers flared.
The protest, which included a prominent US scientist, took place after Chinese diplomats sought to water down a section spelling out the degree of certainty researchers attach to the impact of climate change.
During a fractious night of negotiation, China and Saudi Arabia were identified as the countries which sought most systematically to dilute the text.
Feelings were running high because the summary produced will be read by heads of government, including Tony Blair and Germany's Angela Merkel, according to Hans Verolme, director of WWF's climate change programme. The summary is an unusual hybrid, crafted by scientists but endorsed by diplomats, thereby gaining political, as well as academic, credibility.
One of those who left the large, crescent-shaped conference room in the Charlemagne building in Brussels was Cynthia Rosenzweig, senior research scientist at the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies and one of the report's authors.
Asked why things got so heated, she replied: "I think that scientists and government representatives are two different groups of people, they have different ways of operating and standards of evidence. When scientists come together with these government people you have some sparks flying." She added: "The lead authors wanted the governments to know that we felt strongly that we have very high confidence that the statement was justified. So I made that point emphatically".
The US eventually brokered a compromise which avoided any watering down of the reference to a "very high confidence" by removing the clause altogether.
(More ... Independent > News > World > World Politics)
Published: 07 April 2007
Some of the world's best-informed climate change scientists walked out of an all-night drafting session of yesterday's report on global warming, as tempers flared.
The protest, which included a prominent US scientist, took place after Chinese diplomats sought to water down a section spelling out the degree of certainty researchers attach to the impact of climate change.
During a fractious night of negotiation, China and Saudi Arabia were identified as the countries which sought most systematically to dilute the text.
Feelings were running high because the summary produced will be read by heads of government, including Tony Blair and Germany's Angela Merkel, according to Hans Verolme, director of WWF's climate change programme. The summary is an unusual hybrid, crafted by scientists but endorsed by diplomats, thereby gaining political, as well as academic, credibility.
One of those who left the large, crescent-shaped conference room in the Charlemagne building in Brussels was Cynthia Rosenzweig, senior research scientist at the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies and one of the report's authors.
Asked why things got so heated, she replied: "I think that scientists and government representatives are two different groups of people, they have different ways of operating and standards of evidence. When scientists come together with these government people you have some sparks flying." She added: "The lead authors wanted the governments to know that we felt strongly that we have very high confidence that the statement was justified. So I made that point emphatically".
The US eventually brokered a compromise which avoided any watering down of the reference to a "very high confidence" by removing the clause altogether.
(More ... Independent > News > World > World Politics)
Labels: Climate Change, Independent
¶ 14:10 0 comments
4.06.2007
Warming Álready Changing World' (news.BBC.co.uk)
Last Updated: Thursday, 5 April 2007, 23:47 GMT 00:47 UK
Climate change is already having major impacts on the natural world, a UN report is set to announce.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes there is also a discernible, though less marked, impact on human societies.
The IPCC is to release a summary of its report on Friday but talks on wording have continued late into the night.
Officials said there were differences between various countries on the strength of the language.
"The Europeans want to send a strong signal. The US does not want as much quantification," one official told the French news agency AFP.
China and Russia had also raised concerns over some passages of the 21-page summary, the official said.
The last-minute wrangling is likely to affect the degree of certainty in the final version, the BBC's Richard Black reports, but not the overall direction.
(More ... BBC > News > Science/Nature)
Climate change is already having major impacts on the natural world, a UN report is set to announce.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes there is also a discernible, though less marked, impact on human societies.
The IPCC is to release a summary of its report on Friday but talks on wording have continued late into the night.
Officials said there were differences between various countries on the strength of the language.
"The Europeans want to send a strong signal. The US does not want as much quantification," one official told the French news agency AFP.
China and Russia had also raised concerns over some passages of the 21-page summary, the official said.
The last-minute wrangling is likely to affect the degree of certainty in the final version, the BBC's Richard Black reports, but not the overall direction.
(More ... BBC > News > Science/Nature)
Labels: BBC News, Climate Change
¶ 13:40 0 comments
4.03.2007
Justices Say EPA Has Power to Act on Harmful Gases (NYTimes.com)
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: April 3, 2007
WASHINGTON, April 2 — In one of its most important environmental decisions in years, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases in automobile emissions. The court further ruled that the agency could not sidestep its authority to regulate the greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change unless it could provide a scientific basis for its refusal.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Yesterday’s OpinionGraphic
Yesterday’s Opinion
Audio Back Story With Felicity Barringer (mp3)
Related
Text of the Opinion: Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (pdf)
Recent Articles on Global Warming
Gore Warns Congress of ‘Planetary Emergency’ (March 22, 2007)
U.S. Predicting Steady Increase for Emissions (March 3, 2007)
On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty (Feb. 6, 2007)
Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’ (Feb. 3, 2007)
A New Middle Stance Emerges in Debate over Climate (Jan. 1, 2007)
Justices’ First Brush With Global Warming (Nov. 30, 2006)
Readers' Opinions
A Reader Forum
Do rich nations have an obligation to help poorer ones prepare for potential changes caused by global warming?
* Post a Comment
Related
The Climate Divide: Reports From Four Fronts in the War on Warming (April 3, 2007)
The 5-to-4 decision was a strong rebuke to the Bush administration, which has maintained that it does not have the right to regulate carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases under the Clean Air Act, and that even if it did, it would not use the authority. The ruling does not force the environmental agency to regulate auto emissions, but it would almost certainly face further legal action if it failed to do so.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said the only way the agency could “avoid taking further action” now was “if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change” or provides a good explanation why it cannot or will not find out whether they do.
Beyond the specific context for this case — so-called “tailpipe emissions” from cars and trucks, which account for about one-fourth of the country’s total emissions of heat-trapping gases — the decision is likely to have a broader impact on the debate over government efforts to address global warming.
Court cases around the country had been held up to await the decision in this case. Among them is a challenge to the environmental agency’s refusal to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, now pending in the federal appeals court here. Individual states, led by California, are also moving aggressively into what they have seen as a regulatory vacuum.
(More ... New York Times > U.S. > Washington)
Published: April 3, 2007
WASHINGTON, April 2 — In one of its most important environmental decisions in years, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases in automobile emissions. The court further ruled that the agency could not sidestep its authority to regulate the greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change unless it could provide a scientific basis for its refusal.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Yesterday’s OpinionGraphic
Yesterday’s Opinion
Audio Back Story With Felicity Barringer (mp3)
Related
Text of the Opinion: Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (pdf)
Recent Articles on Global Warming
Gore Warns Congress of ‘Planetary Emergency’ (March 22, 2007)
U.S. Predicting Steady Increase for Emissions (March 3, 2007)
On the Climate Change Beat, Doubt Gives Way to Certainty (Feb. 6, 2007)
Science Panel Calls Global Warming ‘Unequivocal’ (Feb. 3, 2007)
A New Middle Stance Emerges in Debate over Climate (Jan. 1, 2007)
Justices’ First Brush With Global Warming (Nov. 30, 2006)
Readers' Opinions
A Reader Forum
Do rich nations have an obligation to help poorer ones prepare for potential changes caused by global warming?
* Post a Comment
Related
The Climate Divide: Reports From Four Fronts in the War on Warming (April 3, 2007)
The 5-to-4 decision was a strong rebuke to the Bush administration, which has maintained that it does not have the right to regulate carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases under the Clean Air Act, and that even if it did, it would not use the authority. The ruling does not force the environmental agency to regulate auto emissions, but it would almost certainly face further legal action if it failed to do so.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said the only way the agency could “avoid taking further action” now was “if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change” or provides a good explanation why it cannot or will not find out whether they do.
Beyond the specific context for this case — so-called “tailpipe emissions” from cars and trucks, which account for about one-fourth of the country’s total emissions of heat-trapping gases — the decision is likely to have a broader impact on the debate over government efforts to address global warming.
Court cases around the country had been held up to await the decision in this case. Among them is a challenge to the environmental agency’s refusal to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, now pending in the federal appeals court here. Individual states, led by California, are also moving aggressively into what they have seen as a regulatory vacuum.
(More ... New York Times > U.S. > Washington)
Labels: Climate Change, New York Times, SCOTUS
¶ 19:01 0 comments
