Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

Condoleezza Rice becomes the third member of the Bush administration to accuse Cheney of lying in his memoir

 

 

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is the third senior official from President George W. Bush's administration to accuse Dick Cheney of lying in his new memoir, "In My Time."

 

Rice told Reuters in an interview Wednesday that she "kept the president fully and completely informed about every 'in and out' of the negotiations with the North Koreans," countering the former vice president's assertion that Rice misled the president about nuclear diplomacy with North Korea.

 

"You can talk about policy differences without suggesting that your colleague somehow misled the president," Rice said. "You know, I don't appreciate the attack on my integrity that that implies."

 

Rice also disputed Cheney's assertion that Rice "tearfully admitted" she was wrong for wanting the administration to apologize for President Bush's claim in the 2003 State of the Union that Iraq was searching for uranium for nuclear weapons.

 

"It certainly doesn't sound like me, now, does it?" Rice said."I would never -- I don't remember coming to the vice president tearfully about anything in the entire eight years that I knew him."

 

Rice admitted that she told Cheney he had been correct about the press reaction to the uranium claim.

 

Rice is the third former official from George W. Bush's State Department to dispute parts of Cheney's memoir, which was published on Tuesday.

 

The book has provoked rebukes this week from former Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as Powell's former chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson.

 

During an appearance on CBS's "Face the Nation" on Sunday, Powell defended himself, Rice and others against what he said were "cheap shots" lobbed by Cheney in his memoir to boost book sales.

 

Powell said contrary to Cheney's claims, the former vice president deserves no credit for Powell's resignation, that Powell presented dissenting views on the Iraq War to the president and that Powell and his former Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, are not to blame for the Valerie Plame scandal.

 

In an interview with "Democracy Now!" on Tuesday, Wilkerson asserted that Cheney's fears of being tried as a war criminal influenced how the former vice president characterized situations in his memoir.

 

"This is a book written out of fear, fear that one day someone will 'Pinochet' Dick Cheney," Wilkerson said, referring to Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator who was charged for war crimes.

 

Wilkerson said it was "utter nonsense" for Cheney to claim to have anything to do with Powell's resignation.

 

"The only person Cheney does not seem to find fault with is Cheney," Wilkerson said.

 

Wilkerson said he regrets not resigning for putting together Powell's February 2003 presentation to the United Nations on the supposed presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

 

Creating that presentation "was probably the biggest mistake of my life," he said.

 

 

Darth Cheney strikes again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fineman: Dems Tell Me Campaign Will Be A "Down And Dirty" Attack

 

 

 

"When I talk to Democrats outside and inside the White House, as I did today what I heard was a slightly different message," Howard Fineman said on tonight's "Hardball."

 

Fineman reveals that the Democratic strategy for the presidential and Congressional elections will be "down and dirty."

 

"It's not going to be a 'Morning in America' campaign, it's going to be a darkness at midnight campaign about the Republicans. It's going to be about the fact that the Republicans in Congress pushed Paul Ryan's bill Medicare, about how they pushed Cut, Cap and Balance. It's about how Republicans wanted to dismantle Wall Street reform. It's going to be about how the Republican presidential candidates have embraced the Tea Party."

 

"Those are going to be the two central messages of a campaign that's mostly going to be about attack. I think this is -- just like 2008 was in some respects an uplifting campaign, from both sides -- this one is going to be down and dirty from the beginning from both sides."

 

 

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

York: Left paints the campaign as a religious war

 

 

 

The fundamental facts of the presidential race at this moment are that unemployment is high, the economy is by far the most important issue to American voters, and President Obama's handling of economic questions is overwhelmingly unpopular. Republican presidential hopefuls Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and others are hammering the president daily on matters of job creation and economic growth.

 

Now some of Obama's activist allies and supporters in the press are engaged in a sharply focused effort to change the subject. Even as economic anxieties continue to rise, some of the nation's premier political journalists are consumed with the alleged influences of obscure religious philosophers on Republican candidates; on questions of creationism, evolution, and the age of the Earth; and on the fantasy that a Republican president might transform the United States into an Iranian-style theocracy.

 

For example, theDaily Beast/Newsweek recently published an article titled "A Christian Plot for Domination?" claiming that Perry and Bachmann are "deeply associated with a theocratic strain of Christian fundamentalism" known as Dominionism. A widely discussed article in the Texas Observer claimed that Dominionists -- a "little-known movement of radical Christians" -- are readying an "army of God" to "commandeer civilian government," with Perry the "vessel" for their ambitions. Finally, the New Yorker published a long article claiming that Bachmann believes "Christians, and Christians alone, are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns."

 

Surveying those articles, the executive editor of the New York Times, Bill Keller, concludes that "an unusually large number" of Republican candidates "belong to churches that are mysterious or suspect to many Americans." Perry and Bachmann, in particular, are connected to "fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity," which Keller says "has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction." Fearing that Perry or Bachmann could be a "Trojan horse" for a religious takeover of the government, Keller advocates strict questioning of candidates on doctrinal issues.

 

Put aside whether there is some bias against Christianity in these baseless charges, or whether liberals are proposing the kind of religious test for office that the Founders explicitly rejected. It has often been remarked that, given today's terrible economy, Barack Obama cannot run in 2012 on the theme of hope, as he did in 2008. With his record, he'll have to run on fear -- that is, on convincing voters that Republicans are just too scary to elect.

 

This is what running on fear looks like. Could the president's political strategists be anything less than delighted with the work of Keller and his colleagues?

 

Out on the campaign trail, Democratic activists are trying to maneuver the candidates into statements to feed the Republicans-are-religious-nuts narrative. For example, in New Hampshire a few weeks ago, a young boy approached Perry with a series of questions about science. How old is the Earth? the boy asked. As Perry answered (he said he didn't know), the boy's mother pushed her son to confront the governor. "Ask him about evolution," she ordered the boy. "Ask him why he doesn't believe in science." Perry's answer -- that evolution is a theory that has "some gaps" -- provided more material for Keller and the subject-changers.

 

Elsewhere on the trail, so-called "trackers" from the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, David Brock's American Bridge, and other organizations follow Republicans around, sometimes posing out-of-the-blue questions in hopes of throwing a candidate off message. "It's all about homosexuality, Islam, anything that is remotely sensitive socially," says Ellen Carmichael, spokeswoman for frequent target Herman Cain. "That's what they usually ask about."

 

Not even the longest of longshot candidates is immune. Back in May, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson spoke at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, S.C., touting his record on job creation and cutting spending. After Johnson's talk, a staffer for the Center for American Progress approached him with questions about Shariah law. Johnson was baffled.

 

Meanwhile, with the economy still tanking, some liberal commentators have worked themselves into a virtual panic over religion. On Wednesday alone, one Washington Post columnist declared flatly that "Rick Perry is a theocrat," while another discussed the urgent task of "saving America from Rick Perry."

 

Will these diversionary efforts succeed? Political journalists can talk about theocracy all they want, but Americans are still overwhelmingly concerned with jobs. The more hysterical the religious speculation becomes, the more voters will be able to spot an effort to change the subject.

 

------

 

Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com.

 

 

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's sad to hear. Basically, the Democrats are gonna try and out-Repbulican the Republicans. Sad there won't be a coherent and spirited debate about the real issues. Its going to be about getting or keeping power by any means necesssary. 3rd party candidates are looking better right now.

 

Well, Obama can't sell the rosy, optimistic stuff this time around. Foreign policy are his only achievements that I can think of and the voters don't care about that. Its their wallet and the future of their wallet. Understandable. It my concern as well.

 

So sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Insiders: GOP Would Be Better Off With Romney for 2012

 

 

 

Texas Gov. Rick Perry may be surging in polls of Republican primary voters, but his party's Insiders aren't convinced he'd be the best general election candidate. More than two-thirds of Republican Insiders say Mitt Romney has a better chance than Perry of defeating President Obama in 2012, according to this week's National Journal Political Insiders Poll.

 

Many Republican Insiders acknowledged Perry's appeal to conservatives but questioned his ability to win over independent voters. "Perry can fire up the base, but this election will be won in the middle, not on the fringes," said one. Said another, "Having trouble ID-ing a single independent who'd vote for Perry."

 

Democratic Insiders echoed that assessment by an even larger majority. "This election is sitting on a platter for Republicans if they do it right," said one. "Romney is probably good enough. Perry will get drilled by independent voters and women." Another quipped, "Rick Perry is all base and no swing."

 

Insiders in both parties raised questions about Perry's durability under the intense scrutiny of a presidential campaign. "As a conservative Republican, I love Rick Perry," said one Republican Insider, who added "but as a campaign strategist, I know the degree to which a few self-reinforcing oppo-hits can devastate a candidate." A Democratic Insider said plainly, "Perry's mouth will do him in."

 

Republicans and Democrats alike also pointed to Perry's similarities to another Texas governor as a liability. "Obama's best argument may be, 'We won't go back,'" said one Republican Insider. "Why make it easy for them by nominating someone who can't help but remind voters of George W. Bush?"

 

Romney's strength in the poll wasn't solely based on concerns about Perry. Insiders identified Romney's business background, his veteran campaign team, and his appeal to moderate voters as key general election strengths. "Romney has more national experience and more seasoned players, will trip himself up less, and will more successfully make the president's performance the central issue," said a Republican Insider.

 

A Democratic Insider added, "There is no state Perry can win that Mitt Romney won't. There are some states Romney can put into play (MA, OH, PA, NH) that are harder for Perry to win."

 

Still, some Republican Insiders see Perry's outsized personality and ability to appeal to the party's base as beneficial in a race against Obama. "Romney can't match Obama in personality, but Perry can," said one. Another added, "Perry excites the base and unifies the Reagan coalition. Romney doesn't."

 

One Democratic Insider agreed, warning against underestimating Perry. "It's 1980 again. Some think Perry is too extreme, but it is his ability to appear genuine and confident that voters will remember."

 

The National Journal Political Insiders Poll is a regular survey of political operatives, strategists, campaign consultants and lobbyists in both parties.

 

 

 

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Romney wins and picks the right running mate it will be very difficult for Obama. It will be a very close tight race.

 

Perry has charisma similar to Obama but not the intellect. Romney has good enough intellect close enough to Obama but not his charisma.

 

Its going to be a nasty fight but I don't think nearly as nasty as Bush Gore. The problem for both parties in this election is being too nasty and turning off voters.

 

As I said before, the wild card that isn't talked about are events that will happen between now and the election. Be they changes in the economy in one direction, domestic or foreign event. The economy getting worse obviously hurts Obama and may kill him off as it did Bush in '92. A foreign event that galvanizes the people behind the President could win it for Obama. Something will happen.

 

The other things that aren't being talked about are the congressiona races. The congress will not look the same, that's for sure. Huntsman is the only Republican I may consider voting for besides Paul.

 

Everyone knows the Republican heiarchy wants Romney. They will push for him. So, as I said, Romney v Obama in Penna., Ohio, Mich., and Fla. will decide the race. The whole country comes down to a handful of states. Amazing.

 

One person who I hear my run in 2016 if Obama wins and who I aways thought would make a great president is Jeb Bush. His brother f*cked it up for him. He's moderate, smart, has good ideas and being the former governor of Florida would only have to work on Ohio. Basically he wins both those states and he's President. It sounds too simplistic but I've heard that. Its almost impossible in today's poltical world to lose BOTH Forida and Ohio and still win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd long heard that Jeb Bush was supposed to be the Prez, not GWB. Jeb seems much more intelligent and capable.

 

Meanwhile ...

 

 

US economy created no job growth in August, data show

 

 

First time since 1945 that government has reported net monthly job change of zero

 

 

WASHINGTON — Employment growth ground to a halt in August, as sagging consumer confidence discouraged already skittish U.S. businesses from hiring, keeping pressure on the Federal Reserve to provide more monetary stimulus to aid the struggling economy.

 

Nonfarm payrolls were unchanged last month, the Labor Department said Friday. It was the first time since 1945 that the government has reported a net monthly job change of zero. The August payrolls report was the worst since September 2010, while nonfarm employment for June and July was revised to show 58,000 fewer jobs.

 

“The bottom line is this is bad,†Diane Swonk, chief economist with financial services firm Mesirow Financial, told CNBC Friday.

 

Despite the lack of employment growth, the jobless rate held steady at 9.1 percent in August. The unemployment rate is derived from a separate survey of households, which showed an increase in employment and a tick up in the labor force participation rate.

 

While the jobs report underscored the frail state of the economy, the hiring slowdown probably will not be seen as a recession signal as layoffs are not rising that much.

 

...

 

 

More

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...