President Bush's speech before the Knesset appears to have been well received in Israel, as McClatchy reports, but his remarks regarding "appeasement" of dictators have ignited a political firestorm that has landed Bush's Mideast visit right in the middle of the US presidential campaign. According to some media commentators, that is exactly what the White House intended, notwithstanding that the President never mentioned Obama by name. NBC Nightly News, which led with the story, noted that in his speech Bush devoted "one particular paragraph" to invoke "the fight against the horrors of Nazi Germany, and it was clear to those listening that it was in part to make a point about Barack Obama back home." It was, said NBC, "today's political shot heard around the world. The concussion was instantaneous. Upon hearing the news, one Democratic senator [later identified as Sen. Joe Biden] used a word we cannot use on this broadcast."
ABC World News said that Bush made a "statement almost guaranteed to provoke a firestorm of reaction." Bush was shown saying, "Some seem to believe we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals. ... We've heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared, 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.'" NBC noted "White House officials denied that the President was taking a swipe solely at...Obama, who has vowed he would negotiate with Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other rogue leaders that the Bush Administration has shunned." ABC adds that the Obama campaign "wasted no time accusing...Bush of mounting 'a false political attack.'" The Los Angeles Times adds that Obama "issued a statement calling it 'sad' that Bush used the speech to take a partisan shot."
The CBS Evening News also reported on a "two-pronged Republican attack today on...Obama." Noting Bush's comments, CBS added that when McCain "jumped into the fray, there was no doubt where he was aiming." McCain was shown saying, "Why does Barack Obama, Senator Obama, want to sit down with a state-sponsor of terrorism? It is a serious error on the part of Senator Obama. It shows naiveté and inexperience."
While Hillary Clinton came to Obama's defense, USA Today, however, notes "Obama has said in the past he would meet with heads of state in places like Cuba, Iran and North Korea," and that Clinton has said "those meetings could be used for propaganda and her first response would be outreach through other diplomatic channels."
The New York Times reports, "The episode placed Mr. Bush squarely in one of the most divisive debates of the campaign to succeed him, as Republicans try to portray Mr. Obama as weak in the fight against terrorism." It also "underscored what the White House has said will be an aggressive effort by Mr. Bush to use his presidential platform to influence the presidential race."
On the CBS Evening News Jeff Greenfield said Bush "made a statement that everyone knew including the White House, had to be seen as a frontal attack on Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee. This is a key theme we're going to hear all fall that Barack is naive, inexperienced, doesn't understand the real danger that is out there in the world." The other reason is that "the Republicans think they have a shot at the traditionally Democratic Jewish vote." McClatchy reports Jewish voters "comprise sizable voting blocs in some key general-election states. Polls suggest that they may be reluctant to give the Illinois senator, if he's the Democratic Party presidential nominee, the same 3-to-1 majority that John Kerry rolled up over Bush in 2004."
Fox Special Report reported Democrats were "furious." Fox News added, "Top Democrats, many of whom haven't even endorsed" Obama "rushed to his defense." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is still neutral in the presidential race, "lashed out at Mr. Bush." Pelosi was shown saying, "I think what the President did in that regard is beneath the dignity of the office of president and unworthy of our representation at that observance in Israel." Meanwhile, "another unaffiliated Democrat, Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, condemned Bush's suggestion of Obama weakness." Levin said, "But for him to use purple prose such as somebody is appeasing, it seems to me is, totally inappropriate."
In a speech in Ohio, Sen. John McCain yesterday predicted that, as president, he would oversee a US victory in Iraq that would allow most American troops to leave that country by 2013. McCain's remarks are being cast as somewhat of a reversal because, as the New York Times put it, they were "a striking departure from Mr. McCain's refusal so far to set a date for an American withdrawal." The speech "offered no proposals for how Mr. McCain would achieve that vision," and were "an attempt by the presumptive Republican nominee to define himself and the rationale of his candidacy to voters before he has a single Democratic rival who will try to do it for him." Likewise, the Wall Street Journal says McCain offered "his first date for withdrawal" while "refuting Democratic charges he would keep the US mired" in Iraq "indefinitely." The Journal notes McCain "said that by the end of his first term, there would be only 'spasmodic' violence in Iraq and a small contingent of US forces would remain in a noncombat role." The Los Angeles Times similarly says "the prediction marks a major departure for" McCain.
Unlike many recent McCain speeches, this one received significant play on the evening news programs. NBC Nightly News said McCain "has been tagged as you may know with that comment he once made about US troops staying in Iraq for 100 years if need be. Today he revised that number way down." However, NBC added, "McCain's biggest challenge may that be he has to beat two opponents, the Democrat and the trouble surrounding his own party." The CBS Evening News noted "Democrats say McCain's crystal ball must be clouded. Their crystal ball, they say, not surprisingly, shows a Democrat in the White House for the next four years, and the troops home from Iraq long before 2013."
The Washington Times adds that McCain's "prediction puts him between President Bush, who has never set even the broadest timetable, and the two Democratic candidates." The Washington Post reports on its front page, "The Iraq comments appeared designed to blunt the political toll of the presumptive GOP nominee's unwavering support for the unpopular war," but McCain "quickly dismissed the suggestion that he was abandoning his criticism of Democrats and their plans for a precipitous departure."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
The Wall Street Journal reports this morning that Sen. Barack Obama yesterday "received the backing of the United Steelworkers Union, which boasts some 600,000 members." The endorsement "came a day after former rival John Edwards offered to support the Illinois senator -- who also picked up five of Mr. Edwards's delegates." The AP adds "the union tide is turning toward" Obama, "but cracks are showing inside the labor movement as its leaders grapple with internal and external strife as the nomination race drags on." While "more and more labor unions are lining up behind the Illinois senator," there is "still a major union plum to be had, the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor organization." The CNN said the endorsement gives "a big potential boost" in Obama's "bid to attract blue-collar support."
The AP reports Sen. Barack Obama "collected the support of seven of John Edwards' Democratic convention delegates" yesterday. Combined with several other superdelegate endorsements, the new support "brought Obama's overall delegate total to 1,898, compared to 1,718 for his rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton. It takes 2,026 to clinch the nomination at the party convention in Denver this summer." McClatchy reports that six of Edwards' eight delegates in South Carolina have jumped to the Obama camp, one more than the AP is counting.
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports Washington Rep. Jim McDermott endorsed Obama yesterday, saying, "I am confident as president he will end the war in Iraq and bring our sons and daughters home." The AP reports California Reps. Henry Waxman and Howard Berman also endorsed Obama yesterday.
Fox News reports that the Tennessee GOP "is at odds with the Barack Obama campaign again," and has just "released a new Web video targeting Obama's wife Michelle for saying earlier this year she is proud of her country 'for the first time.' The video - which intersperses clips of Michelle Obama's remarks with clips of Tennessee residents rattling off the many ways they are proud of their country - drew instant fire from the Obama campaign." The AP adds, "Obama's campaign accused the Tennessee GOP of engaging in smear politics and unfairly going after the candidate's family."
The Politico reports there are "grumblings from the almost-half of the" Democratic Party, "disproportionately women, whose candidate is losing. An Ohio-based group of Democratic Hillary Clinton supporters say they'll work actively against Sen. Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee, arguing that Clinton has been the subject of 'intense sexism' by party leaders and the media." Led by "Boomer-aged women, the group, Clinton Supporters Count Too, is holding a press conference in Columbus at noon to release this statement."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Despite much of the political world writing off her struggling campaign, Sen. Hillary Clinton is still campaigning hard, making multiple stops in South Dakota yesterday, the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader reports this morning. The AP reports this morning that Clinton is expected to campaign in Oregon today, which holds its primary on Tuesday, while Sen. Barack Obama is expected to be there over the weekend.
The New Republic, a left-of-center political magazine whose writers have strong contacts with Democratic staffers, runs an extensive analysis of the Clinton campaign today called "What Went Wrong?" which it describes as "The exclusive story of Hillary's fall, as told by the high-level advisors, staffers, fundraisers, and on-the-ground organizers who lived it." It includes (unnamed) Clinton campaign staffers blaming each other, various campaign officials, including Mark Penn and Patti Solis Doyle, and the candidate for the failure of the campaign.
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Media reports are casting yesterday's California Supreme Court ruling, which declared the state's gay marriage ban unconstitutional, as a momentous development one that, moreover, could inject the issue into the national political landscape. On ABC World News, George Stephanopoulos said the ruling likely to have some impact on the presidential campaign, "but not the kind of game-changing issue you might expect, in part because so many states already ban gay marriage now. This initiative will be likely be on the ballot in California. That could energize conservatives."
The Wall Street Journal notes John McCain "opposes gay marriage but also voted against a federal constitutional amendment that would have banned it, saying such a move was 'un-Republican' because it trampled federalist principles." While Barack Obama "has said he personally believes marriage is between a man and a woman, he has advocated for civil unions and full legal rights for gay couples."
The AP reports the issue "injects an element of uncertainty into a presidential race in which the Iraq war and the sputtering economy have largely overshadowed social issues." The New York Times reports "not one" candidate "has shown any eagerness to make the issue a priority. Senator McCain, for example, did not mention it in a speech he gave Thursday outlining what he wanted to do as president."
USA Today reports "the issue could unite social conservatives who haven't been enthusiastic about the presidential election," but "moves against gay marriage could put Republicans at odds with voters in the Rocky Mountain states, a battleground region where many voters have live-and-let-live attitudes."
The Christian Science Monitor, meanwhile, says "an upgrading of the issue might spell trouble for Democrats. Voters in Florida a potential battleground state will vote on a ballot initiative in November to ban same-sex marriage that could galvanize conservatives to vote."
Two network newscasts led with the story last night. ABC World News called the "4-3 ruling by the California Supreme Court...clear and historic: Gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry in California." The CBS Evening News noted California joins "Massachusetts as the only states where it's legal for people of the same gender to marry." NBC Nightly News reported, "Opposition groups say they have gathered more than one million signatures to get a measure on the November ballot that would wipe out the decision by changing the state constitution to say that marriage can only exist between men and women."
In an unusual development, 132 House Republicans voted "present" on the supplemental spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which led to the bill's defeat on a 141-149 vote. The Wall Street Journal reports the House "rejected $163 billion in additional funding for the wars" as Republicans "held back their support in protest against Democrats' efforts to add domestic-spending items to the legislation." The Journal notes "antiwar Democrats opposed the funding, with some applauding as 132 Republicans voted 'present' and the funding failed."
The Hill notes "House Republicans knocked the carefully choreographed Iraq war funding process into chaos," in what was a "protest against the tactics of Democrats, who added hard-to-veto domestic spending to the measure and bypassed the committee process." The Politico says Democrats "bypassed the House Appropriations Committee and brought the massive war supplemental spending bill directly to the floor in three parts, a move that Republicans vigorously objected to."
The Washington Post says yesterday's "unusual coalition of antiwar Democrats and angry Republicans" left "Democratic leaders baffled. House leaders had broken the war-funding bill into three separate measures, the first to fund the wars, the second to impose strict military policy measures opposed by President Bush, and the third to fund domestic priorities, including expanded education benefits and flood control work around New Orleans." But "that legislative legerdemain became the plan's undoing."
Meanwhile, the AP reports House Democrats "approved a non-binding plan seeking an exit from Iraq by December of next year." The 224 to 196 vote "mostly broke along party lines and runs into a veto threat from...Bush."
In the Senate, The Hill reports the Appropriations Committee "on Thursday approved a sweeping emergency wartime funding package that includes restrictions on President Bush's Iraq policy and provides tens of billions for new domestic programs." The package "includes three separate amendments: $169 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through part of next year; more than $25 billion in new domestic spending; and language that sets a goal for the president to transition troops out of a military role in Iraq by June 2009." Another story in The Hill notes the Senate bill contains "a controversial provision to help pave the way for undocumented agriculture workers to win legal status, a move that may reopen the divisive immigration debate on the Senate floor."
Both chambers of Congress have now passed farm legislation which President Bush has pledged to veto by large majorities. Media reports portray Bush's expected veto as an exercise in futility, as supporters have enough votes to override. McClatchy, for example, says "Bush will now follow the lead of the late Dwight Eisenhower by vetoing a comprehensive farm bill." But Eisenhower "won his showdown, the last time a president vetoed a major, standalone farm bill. Bush, on the other hand, will lose." The AP notes the Senate yesterday voted 81 to 15 to pass the bill, "a day after the House approved it with 318 'yes' votes."
The Christian Science Monitor says in the Senate, "many Republicans said they had to part ways with the president. 'I'm disgusted with aspects of this bill, but I had no choice. North Carolina is the third largest agricultural state in the country,' said Sen. Richard Burr (R) of North Carolina after the vote." But the New York Times reports "most legislators were not swayed by Mr. Bush's description of the bill as bloated, expensive and packed with 'a variety of gimmicks.'"
The Hill reports Democrats "crowed over the vote and its margin," while Republicans, "many of whom were in the awkward position of defending the president while supporting the bill, were more glum."
On a 256-166 vote, the House approved a tax aimed at high-earners, a measure proposed by Democrats to offset the cost of increasing education opportunities for veterans. The New York Times reports Democrats are "banking on the idea that most Americans will have no quarrel with requiring those on the highest economic rung to pay for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan to receive the equivalent of a free four-year college education at a public university." Leading Republicans "said a tax was a tax, accusing Democrats of pushing policy that could harm the economy in a downturn, particularly those small-business operators whose earnings are taxed as regular income."
The AP adds that to pay for the new GI Bill "and adhere to budget rules requiring new benefit programs not add to the deficit, the Democratic plan would impose a surtax on individuals with incomes above $500,000. Couples would pay the tax on income exceeding $1 million."
Senate negotiators are near a deal on a bill to offer aid to homeowners facing foreclosure. The Washington Post reports the negotiators "broke off talks last night without striking a deal to rescue hundreds of thousands of homeowners at risk of foreclosure, but they said they were close to an agreement." Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd and ranking Republican Sen. Richard C. Shelby "plan to meet again Tuesday to discuss the proposal." According to an aide to Shelby, "the two senators had 'an agreement in concept' on the measure."
The Hill reports, "Key senators say they're close to a deal on legislation that would rescue homeowners facing foreclosure." Dodd said, "I'm pretty optimistic," and "Shelby also pronounced himself hopeful."
The Financial Times reports, "While the Democratic leadership in Congress has pressed hard for the FHA plan," the GOP has said "it involved excessive risk for taxpayers and was a 'bail-out' for speculators." The AP reports, "The delay on the action until next week clouded the prospects of an emerging compromise."
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Administration is a "surprising wild card" in the national debate about a housing rescue. "For weeks, lawmakers say, the administration has sent conflicting signals about what kind of bill it would approve, vacillating between veto threats and suggestions of flexibility."
Bill Opposed By "Fake Grassroots" Website In a front page story, the Wall Street Journal reports that AngryRenter.com emphasizes "prudent renters' outrage over a proposed government bailout for irresponsible homeowners." But while "it purports to be a spontaneous uprising, AngryRenter.com is actually a product of an inside-the-Beltway conservative advocacy organization led by Dick Armey, the former House majority leader, and publishing magnate Steve Forbes."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Jay Leno: "Huge political fireworks today after President Bush went to Israel and he talked about American politicians who might want to talk with Hamas or other leaders. Politicians who would sit down and appease terrorists. He said he would not do it. He would not put up with it. He would never talk to terrorists. And then he flew to Saudi Arabia to spend a couple of days with the Saudi royal family."
Jay Leno: "Well, the big story in politics is that John Edwards has officially endorsed Barack Obama. They say the endorsement will help Obama win what's known as Hillary Democrats. Do you know what those are? Hillary Democrats? Those are Democrats that like to knock back whisky shots while pretending to duck sniper fire."
David Letterman: "Hillary Clinton, I mean God bless her, it looks like now there is no possible way she can win the nomination. So she's not dropping out."
Conan O'Brien: "Barack Obama had to apologize for calling a reporter sweetie. Yeah, meanwhile, Bill Clinton apologized for calling a reporter when her husband was home."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Copyright © 2008 by the Bulletin News Network, Inc.
11190 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 130 • Reston, VA 20191
advertisement
Get your POLITICALBULLETIN
Best Careers 2008
In a shifting job landscape, we've identified where the growth lies.
advertisement
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
