advertisement
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
advertisement
USA Today reports this morning "the US military is ordering airstrikes and taking other security measures to prevent insurgents from launching a 'surge' of their own before next month's report to Congress on Iraq strategy." Al Qaeda "and other militant groups could try to stage high-profile attacks that would make it more difficult for Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker to tell Congress progress is being made under the US war strategy that began in February. 'We are anticipating...that there will be a surge in enemy operations,' said Lt. Col. Chris Garver, a US military spokesman. 'It would not surprise us at all if there were efforts by the enemies to make it look like this isn't working at all.'"
The US is also seeking to take the offensive against Shiite militias. The Financial Times reports, "US forces launched raids and air strikes on Baghdad's Sadr City on Wednesday, killing 32 militants suspected of smuggling arms into Iraq from neighbouring Iran." The US military "said the suspects were believed to be members of a 'special-groups terrorist network known for facilitating the transport of weapons and explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, from Iran to Iraq.'" The AP says "the sweep into Sadr City also sent a strong message that US forces plan no letup on suspected Shiite militia cells despite risks of upsetting the Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and its efforts at closer cooperation with Shiite heavyweight Iran." Iran "has denied support for the violence in Iraq." The Washington Post calls the raid "one of the largest in a series of US attacks against Shiite militias"; the Los Angeles Times and New York Times run similar stories.
Meanwhile, McClatchy notes two new studies are tallying just who the suicide bombers in Iraq are. It turns out they are "overwhelmingly foreigners bent on destabilizing the government and undermining American interests there." Mohammed Hafez's new book, "Suicide Bombers in Iraq," has "identified the nationalities of 124 bombers who attacked in Iraq. Of those, the largest number -- 53 -- were Saudis. In the second study, Robert Pape, "a University of Chicago professor who runs the Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism, identified the nationalities of 55 suicide bombers in Iraq. Sixteen were Saudis, seven were Syrians and five were Algerians. Kuwait, Morocco and Tunisia each supplied three bombers. Thirteen -- 24 percent -- were Iraqi Sunni Muslims."
Even as US commanders claim a degree of military success against al Qaeda in Iraq, a debate is raging over whether Bush's "surge" should get the credit. Last night, the CBS Evening News reported the "US military claims 2,000 al Qaeda operatives have been killed so far this year." But the surge, added CBS, "deserves only part of the credit." Instead, the tide turned "against al Qaeda when Sunni tribes came over to the American side." The Washington Post, meanwhile, analyzes why the Sunni rebels are now taking the US' side. Lt. Col. Douglas Ollivant, a planner for the US military command in Baghdad, is quoted saying, "This is much less about al Qaeda overstepping than about them [Sunnis] realizing that they've lost." As a result, Sunni groups are now "desperately trying to cut deals with us," he added.
Iraq War Critic Calls For "Strategic Patience." Following a similar AFP dispatch yesterday, the Washington Post reports this morning that "Anthony H. Cordesman, a military expert and consistent critic of the Bush administration's strategy in Iraq, released a report yesterday calling for 'strategic patience' in the nation's approach to the war, describing the US military's modest security gains amid dire assessments of the lack of political progress in Iraq." Cordesman "returned two weeks ago from an eight-day trip through Iraq with Brookings Institution analysts Michael E. O'Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack, whose op-ed article in the New York Times last week described new optimism based on their conversations with commanders and observations in places such as Ramadi, Baghdad and Mosul."
Partisanship cuts across virtually every issue in Washington, DC and the health of the US economy is no exception. Most media commentators would appear to fall on the side of those who believe the recent market upheaval is an ominous sign. Tuesday's decision by the Fed not to cut interest rates, for example, unleashed a torrent of negative stories on the economy. ABC World News, for example, said "people looking to borrow money, and hoping the Fed would make that easier today, came away disappointed." The CBS Evening News reported "30-year fixed rate mortgages are averaging 6.68% now. That's if a lender will actually give you one." The Washington Post said "the Fed's rosy outlook was rejected yesterday by some analysts," and the Los Angeles Times, in a front-page story, said "the fear on the Street is that the good times are coming to an abrupt halt."
The negative talk about the economy continues this morning. USA Today, in a story titled "Housing Market Troubles Still Look 'Pretty Gruesome,'" reports, "The housing market blues showed no signs of lifting Wednesday as the National Association of Realtors warned that US home sales in 2007 could fall to a five-year low, and a major home builder...warned of a 21% drop in quarterly revenue. 'It still looks pretty gruesome,' said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors." USA Today adds, "Bloated home prices, feverish real estate speculation and widespread defaults of subprime mortgages have led to a housing slump that some economists fear could drag the US economy into recession." The Wall Street Journal runs a similar report.
Stocks rallied yesterday (for a second straight day) but there was no network TV coverage of the big gains in all major indexes, and only limited attention from major newspapers. As the Wall Street Journal reports, "Optimism about the economy sent the Dow Jones Industrial Average to another triple-digit gain." The Dow "finished ahead 153.56 points, or 1.14%, at 13657.86, capping the biggest three-day point and percentage gain since March 2003." The Nasdaq "rose 2.01%, or 51.38 points, to 2612.98, its biggest one-day point and percentage gain since 2006. It is up 8.2% this year." The Standard & Poor's 500-stock index "rose 1.41%, or 20.78 points, to 1497.49, ahead 5.6% on the year." The Financial Times, under the headline "Wall St Rallies In Volatile Trading" and USA Today, which runs a brief AP story in page 5 of its "Money" section, were among the news outlets that also reported the stock rally.
President Bush tried to turn the tenor of the coverage yesterday, in remarks to a group of journalists after meeting at the Treasury Department. Bush expressed optimism about the economy and called the business environment "sound." The Financial Times says the President "appeared aimed at reclaiming the initiative in the debate over economic policy at a time when Democrats are seeking to exploit widespread pessimism among middle-class Americans about the direction of the US economy." Likewise, the New York Times reports Bush's remarks had two aims: "to reassure Americans about the economy and combat Democratic criticism of his policies." It was, adds the Times, "an unusual presentation for Mr. Bush, both politically and economically. Presidents are usually advised not to wade into discussions of markets at a time when they are so unpredictable and anxiety-inducing." In fact, "immediately after the president's comments, Democrats excoriated him for saying that the economy was in sound shape, and many called on the administration to encourage federal housing agencies to step in and make more money available, perhaps by buying up troubled mortgages to avoid foreclosures."
The Washington Post notes that "despite mounting concern over the downturn in the housing market," Bush "dismissed proposals advanced by prominent Democrats to grant government-chartered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac more freedom to buy mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. And he ruled out any taxpayer bailout of lenders threatened by the subprime home-loan crisis." The Wall Street Journal says the President "shrugged off concerns about stock-market turmoil, saying Wall Street is adjusting to a flood of liquidity and is beginning to 'readjust its assessment of risk.'" He also "dismissed recent polls showing that US citizens are feeling sour about the economy. ... He said he understands 'there's disquiet out there' but attributed much of the economic anxiety to concerns about the war in Iraq. '"I happen to believe the war has clouded a lot of peoples' sense of optimism.'" USA Today reports Bush said "financial markets will be able to work through current turbulence without torpedoing the economy, calling the business environment 'sound.'" The AP says the President "struck a reassuring tone," expressing "confidence that investors would eventually calm down."
Bush made similar points in an interview on Fox News' Your World: "I would point out that the economic growth in the second quarter was 3.4 percent. And I would remind people that this economy is pretty darn strong given the fact that the job picture remains strong. And so there was a correction. And you know, markets tend to correct. And the fundamental question is: Will they correct is such a way as to not derail the good, strong economic growth that we are seeing?"
Bush: Cut Corporate Taxes The Washington Post reports "Bush said yesterday that he is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for US corporations to make them more competitive around the world, an initiative that could further inflame a battle with the Democratic Congress over spending and taxes and help define the remainder of his tenure." The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times also note Bush's tax plan as part of their coverage of Bush's remarks.
McClatchy reports President Bush "vowed Wednesday to veto bipartisan legislation that would sharply increase funding for a popular health insurance program for poor children. ... Asked if he'd veto legislation that increases funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act, called S-Chip, Bush answered while the question was still being asked. 'If S-Chip is used to expand the nationalization of health care, I will veto it,' he said. He said that he'd proposed increasing S-Chip funding in his budget, but much less than Congress wants."
Who's A Child, And Who's Poor? In an editorial this morning, the Wall Street Journal pans the House SCHIP bill. The bill, it writes, "goes so far as to offer increasing 'bonus payments' to states as they enroll more people in their Schip programs. To grease the way, the bill re-labels 'children' as anyone under 25, and 'low income' as up to 400% above the poverty level, or $82,600 for a family of four." It also "includes a new tax on private insurance policies." And to "finance its Schip largesse, the House would eviscerate Medicare Advantage, an innovative 2003 program that allows seniors to choose among various private health plans."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
USA Today reports Mitt Romney "warned Wednesday that the consequences of pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq too soon could be catastrophic, but he also said his support for increased troop levels may not be open-ended." In an interview with USA Today, Romney said, "As long as there's a reasonable probability of success with the surge, that's the right course to follow. If there's not a reasonable probability of success, then you'd have to consider other options."
Despite his support for the Bush policy, Romney faced a potentially embarrassing question from an opponent of the Iraq war, who asked why none of his five sons had enlisted. The AP says Romney "defended his five sons' decision not to enlist in the military, saying they're showing their support for the country by 'helping me get elected.'" Romney, who "did not serve in Vietnam due to his Mormon missionary work and a high draft lottery number, was asked the question by an anti-war activist after a speech in which he called for 'a surge of support' for U.S. forces in Iraq."
The Des Moines Register reports Romney "defended his sons at an early Wednesday stop in Bettendorf when an anti-war activist from Illinois asked why none of the Romney brothers served in the military." That exchange "in a question and answer session and a videotaped dust-up with WHO radio talk show host over Romney's Mormon faith that is still making the rounds appeared to be minor annoyances to Romney's well-organized campaign."
ABC World News reported, "Two of the leading Republican candidates took a timeout from bashing Democrats to go after one another. The flash point, illegal immigration and an issue very important to Republican primary voters." Romney "accused former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of making New York City a safe haven for illegal immigrants." On the campaign trail, Giuliani "emphasizes tougher borders," but "in 1994 as Mayor, he says quote, 'If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city. You're somebody we want to protect.'" Romney "went after Giuliani today, at least in part, to seem tough on the immigration issue, and win support for hard core conservatives for this Saturday's straw poll."
Romney Still Faces Questions On Abortion The Washington Times reports that in Iowa, "a state where 'choose life' yard signs dot the mowed grass between the cornfields and country lanes, abortion can be a make-or-break issue for Republicans, both in the top tier and among those...looking to break out of the lower tier." Romney "assures voters he is now solidly pro-life and that his actions as governor of Massachusetts back that up. But it's a question he has to keep answering again and again - including just hours after the debate, at a town hall in Madrid, when even a self-identified supporter asked Mr. Romney to clarify his position one more time."
In his Washington Post column, David Broder says the Republican presidential candidates have "behaved as if they were vying for the endorsement of Bush and Dick Cheney." An endorsement is "not likely to be forthcoming, and it's questionable how much one would be worth, given the historically low approval ratings those two share. But the rhetoric of most of the 2008 hopefuls, as they campaigned last week in Iowa, suggested a full embrace of Bush-Cheney orthodoxy, not only on terrorism and Iraq but even on the threat to veto a bipartisan Senate bill on children's health insurance." But the eventual GOP nominee "may face an interesting dilemma. How do you reposition yourself after hugging Bush and Cheney for a solid year? What do you do to become suddenly the candidate of change?"
Asked on Fox News' Your World about Republican presidential candidates who "seemed to be piling on" him in the last debate, President Bush said, "I didn't see any pile-on. I mean, there may be some candidates who probably won't be the nominee of the party, for example, using the immigration debate to make points. But I think on the big issues, keeping taxes low, Republican candidates understand it is the right policy."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
The Wall Street Journal reports all the "major Democratic presidential candidates -- and none of the Republicans -- will be in Los Angeles tonight for what was billed as a nonpartisan forum on issues important to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans. The televised event showcases the status that gays' votes and money have earned them in the Democratic Party, but also the continued controversy of their cause."
The Chicago Tribune reports while "opposition operatives will be watching for a video moment that later can be used to portray a candidate as out of the social mainstream, gay-rights advocates will be alert to signs of discomfort or hedged commitment." The Democratic candidates "face evolving but still mixed public attitudes toward homosexuality. Their own party includes an important constituency of gay donors and political activists as well as large numbers of social liberals who look to candidates' views on gay rights as a bellwether for commitment to broader progressive values such as tolerance."
The Los Angeles Times reports, "Subtly but unmistakably, rhetoric from the military and Congress has begun to soften on the policy known as 'don't ask, don't tell.'" At Thursday's forum "for Democratic presidential candidates co-sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights organization, and held in front of about 200 invited guests at a Hollywood video production facility, the ban is expected to receive its most thorough examination since 1993." In surveys "filled out ahead of Thursday's forum, the leading candidates showed a depth of commitment to the repeal that could push the issue back into the limelight."
The Washington Times /AP reports the "homosexual rights movement reaches a milestone today when its agenda is the subject of a televised Democratic presidential candidate forum. Yet many activists - craving bolder support for same-sex couples - view the unprecedented event with mixed emotions." Though "pleased that all the candidates of a major party are courting their votes and endorsing the bulk of their political wish list, they are frustrated that none of the front-runners is calling for legalization of same-sex 'marriage.'"
The Chicago Tribune reports with a "television crew and photographers in tow, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spent Wednesday morning mopping floors, cleaning cobwebs and preparing breakfast for an 86-year-old wheelchair-bound amputee, as he accompanied a home health care worker on her daily duties." A day on the job "has become a new ritual of the Democratic presidential campaign this year, after the powerful 1.9 million-member Service Employees International Union demanded that candidates 'Walk a Day in My Shoes' with a union member in order to be considered for endorsement."
Obama Open To Being Clinton's Number Two Foster's Daily Democrat reported on its website that Obama, responding to Rudy Giuliani's prediction that Sen. Hillary Clinton would win the Democratic nomination and would tap Obama as her running mate, "didn't close the door" on the possibility, but "added: 'If the question is what am I running for, then the answer is president of the United States.'"
Obama Embracing National Security Debate The Financial Times reports the "conventional wisdom in Washington says Barack Obama has so far come off worse in his increasingly fissile exchanges with Hillary Clinton on national security." But the dispute "gives Mr Obama an opportunity to play on his status as a 'Washington outsider,'" and it "make[s] sure that voters understand their candidate is not a liberal pushover who cannot be trusted to be commander-in-chief."
Obama Offers Sympathy For Musharraf The New York Times /AP reports Obama "said Wednesday it's critical for Pakistan to be a constructive ally in fighting al-Qaida, one week after threatening military action to hunt down terrorists if President Pervez Musharraf doesn't act." Obama "twice declined an opportunity to explain the difference between his proposals and the White House's, but expressed sympathy for Musharraf, who faces a growing militant backlash in his Muslim nation."
WPost Says Obama Right On Terrorism The Washington Post says in an editorial that Sen. Obama "recently has taken a number of foreign policy positions with which we disagree, but on this it strikes us that he has the better of the argument -- both on substance and on the importance of debate. Faced with such 'actionable intelligence,' of course any president will weigh risks against potential benefits, and it's impossible to predict that calculus."
The AP reports Hillary Rodham Clinton "said Wednesday that crumbling bridges, crowded seaports and clogged highways threaten the economy and homeland security as well as the public's safety." Clinton said "last week's fatal bridge collapse in Minneapolis underscores the critical need for infrastructure improvements nationwide." She "proposed spending $10 billion over 10 years to repair and upgrade roads, bridges, waterways and seaports."
The Mason City Globe Gazette reported, "Clinton would establish a $10 billion emergency repair fund to help clear a backlog of unfunded repair projects and would offer $250 million in grants to states to pay for safety inspections."
Foster's Daily Democrat reported Clinton "called America's deteriorating infrastructure system a 'silent crisis' that will hamper economic growth if not addressed."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Jay Leno: "President Bush's approval rating went up five points today. See, that's a good thing about these Democratic debates. As soon as they start talking, Bush's ratings go up."
Jay Leno: "Oh, and Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney said they will not participate in the Republican debate next month in Florida. John McCain said he will be there if he can get a ride."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5advertisement
Get your POLITICALBULLETIN
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5Embed exclusive U.S. News headlines, rankings, columns, and blog postings to your Web site, blog, or social network.
advertisement
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
