The Debate Chat is Open!

Grab a drink and a bowl of popcorn then click on the link below to join the Command Post Live Debate Chat.

This will be the place to be seen tonight. We’re expecting some special guests and Alan and I will be there, acting as hosts and encouraging as much chat debate as possible. We’re talking brawls! Fisticuffs! Strip debate poker!

Well, not so much that. But it will be fun, entertaining and informative and, let’s face it, not everyone in your household is going to want to listen to you scream at the tv while you’re watching the debate. But here at TCP chat, we don’t mind your lunatic ravings at all. Birds of a feather…

Enter the chat

Please Note The chat program does not work well with Firefox. I suggest an alterate browser tonight for Firefox users, either IE or Opera.

Debate Night

I will be living blogging the debate at PoliBlog—just click and scroll. The “pre-game coverage” is here.

Also, the Boston Herald has a list of some blogs which are going to be covering the event.

Meanwhile, some pre-debate lists: here and here.

Stephen Green will also be live blogging, which is always fun.

Live Blogging the Debate

We at TCP will not be live blogging the debate, as we’ll be busy in the chat room. However, Blogs for Bush has a long list of bloggers who will be doing so.

Add to that list Stephen Green, who will do his usual Martini Blogging, and Begging to Differ, which boasts a cabal of bloggers from all political stripes who will be going at it.

Chat room opens in fifteen minutes!

TCP Chat Opens At 8:45 p.m. EDT

In case you missed it on the main TCP page, we’ll be opening our chat room tonight at 8:45 p.m. so readers can interact during the debate. We’ll post a link to the chat room and instructions for logging in at that time. Read you there!

First presidential debate to focus on foreign policy

HAARETZ/AP: First presidential debate to focus on foreign policy

The first presidential debate and its focus on foreign policy and security gives both President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry opportunities to dig into each other’s record and patch their own weaknesses on Iraq.

On the campaign trail, Bush and Kerry describe Iraq in terms that could make voters wonder if they’re talking about different countries. Bush sees progress toward stability, democratic elections and civic life. Kerry sees increasing instability, little reconstruction and terrorist havens.

Bush has been portraying the Massachusetts Democrat as too indecisive to take the bold action needed to go after terrorists and evildoers. He can trumpet the successful capture of Saddam Hussein and steps he’s taken to improve security at home.

“There’s an opportunity for him to talk about his vision for the war on terror, describe the way forward in Iraq and, more broadly, in expanding freedom and liberty throughout the greater Mideast,” said Bush strategist Karl Rove.

Nevertheless, Wayne Fields, director of American culture studies at Washington University in St. Louis, said “Bush has got to be more detailed” about his policies and goals in Iraq.

“Where are we going to get the troops to go there, and what’s the cost?” he said.

Bush Ahead In Ohio, Fla. And Pa.

USA Today reports that a New USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll finds President Bush widened his advantage with likely voters in Florida, taken the lead in Pennsylvania, and maintains a small margin over Kerry in Ohio.

From California Yankee.

LA Times Poll: Bush by 5

The latest Los Angeles Times Poll finds President Bush has a 5-percentage-point lead over Sen. John F. Kerry among likely voters.

Likely Voters
Bush 51%
Kerry 46%
Registered Voters
Bush 49%
Kerry 45%

From California Yankee.

The Debate Take From Oz

Gotta’ love Aussies.

It’s being promoted as a prize fight, with both sides exaggerating their opponents’ abilities. In the blue corner, hoping for a knockout, is Democrat John “Rock Jaw” Kerry, who Republicans insist is the greatest debater since the Roman orator Cicero. In the red, dodging and ready to counterstrike, is Republican George “The Fox” Bush, who Democrats claim has never been bested in a debate.

“Rock Jaw” vs. “The Fox.” Our own A. E. Brain? No, but close: The Australian.

al Qaeda To Target Miami?

This from the NY Daily News:

U.S. law enforcement agencies warned authorities in Miami that the al Qaeda terrorist organization might try to attack during the first presidential debate tomorrow, a government spokeswoman said.

One can only hope this is more “Code Orange” caution …

CBS Caught Falsifying Transcript

Correcting a flawed transcript of a TV program is something to be commended. Often small segments can be inadvertantly omitted, and inserting them so the transcript accurately reflects what was actually broadcast is only good journalism.

Inserting lines that were not broadcast is another matter entirely, especially after being criticised for not including relevant facts.

Updating a previous post, CBS has retroactively “corrected” the transcript of a broadcast aired recently.

What used to say

What worries the Coccos is the continuing need for more troops in dangerous places. And the machinery for a draft is already in place: all men have to register when they turn 18.

The head of the Selective Service believes he could start drafting people quickly.

Now says

What worries the Coccos is the continuing need for more troops in dangerous places. And the machinery for a draft is already in place: all men have to register when they turn 18. Beverly Cocco is so concerned she is involved with the organization “People Against the Draft.”

The head of the Selective Service believes he could start drafting people quickly.

CBS weren’t able to edit the captured screen video though, nor the snapshotted article quoted at TCP. Competently falsifying history to deflect criticism is difficult now.

Hat Tip : LGF and RatherBiased.

Will the Flip-Flop Boomerang?

The SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER is reporting that Cheney has changed his position on Iraq:

In an assessment that differs sharply with his view today, Dick Cheney more than a decade ago defended the decision to leave Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War, telling a Seattle audience that capturing Saddam wouldn’t be worth additional U.S. casualties or the risk of getting “bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq.”
Cheney, who was secretary of defense at the time, made the observations answering audience questions after a speech to the Discovery Institute in August 1992, nearly 18 months after U.S. forces routed the Iraqi army and liberated Kuwait.
. . . .
Last week, Cheney attacked Kerry for his alleged inconsistencies. “Senator Kerry … said that under his leadership, more of America’s friends would speak with one voice on Iraq. That seems a little odd coming from a guy who doesn’t speak with one voice himself. By his repeated efforts to recast and redefine the war on terror and our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Senator Kerry has given every indication that he lacks the resolve, the determination and the conviction to prevail in the conflict we face.”
Cheney’s office did not respond to requests for comment about his 1992 statements, nor did the White House. The Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, also asked about the 1992 statements, did not respond.

The trascript was discovered by Seatle Post-Intelligencer columnist Joe Connelly, who wrote in his “In the Northwest” column today entitled Bush-Cheney flip-flops cost America in blood:

The Bush-Cheney campaign has gleefully labeled John Kerry a flip-flopper. But what of Bush-Cheney flip-flops? They’re getting a lot less ink, but America is paying a price in blood.
Little noticed, and worthy of lengthy consideration, is a speech delivered by then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney in 1992 to the Discovery Institute in Seattle.
The words of our future vice president — defending the decision to end Gulf War I without occupying Iraq — eerily foretell today’s morass. Here is what Cheney said in ‘92:
“I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We’d be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.
“And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don’t think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties. And while everybody was tremendously impressed with the low cost of the (1991) conflict, for the 146 Americans who were killed in action and for their families, it wasn’t a cheap war.
“And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam (Hussein) worth? And the answer is not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we’d achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq.”

John Edwards imediately picked up on this in a speach today in West Virginia. From the New York Times:

Edwards Says Bush Administration of Botching Iraq Plans
Seizing on a published report that Vice President Dick Cheney had warned of getting “bogged down” in Iraq 12 years ago, Senator John Edwards today accused the Bush administration of botching plans for occupying Iraq and made clear it would be a topic during presidential debates.
“He knew — that’s the worse part about this — he knew how dangerous this was,” Mr. Edwards told a crowd here. “They knew that there were enormous predictors of what would be happening there and they still didn’t have a plan even though they knew what might be coming.”

San Francisco Chronical reporter Marc Sandalow takes an indepth look at Bush’s evolving rhetoric regading the Iraq war.

Record shows Bush shifting on Iraq war
President Bush portrays his position on Iraq as steady and unwavering as he represents Sen. John Kerry’s stance as ambiguous and vacillating.
“Mixed signals are the wrong signals,” Bush said last week during a campaign stop in Bangor, Maine. “I will continue to lead with clarity, and when I say something, I’ll mean what I say.”
Yet, heading into the first presidential debate Thursday, which will focus on foreign affairs, there is much in the public record to suggest that Bush’s words on Iraq have evolved — or, in the parlance his campaign often uses to describe Kerry, flip-flopped.
An examination of more than 150 of Bush’s speeches, radio addresses and responses to reporters’ questions reveal a steady progression of language, mostly to reflect changing circumstances such as the failure to discover weapons of mass destruction, the lack of ties between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network and the growing violence of Iraqi insurgents.
. . . .
Yet a close look at the record makes it difficult to support Bush campaign chairman Ken Mehlman’s description of the upcoming debate as a “square-off between resolve and optimism versus vacillation and defeatism.”
A careful reading of Bush’s statements on Iraq reveals many instances of consistency, just as The Chronicle’s examination of Kerry’s words found consistency in the Democratic challenger’s statements. Over and over, Bush stated that the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, changed the way Americans — including the commander in chief — viewed the threat of terrorism and lowered the threshold of risk Americans were willing to accept.
. . . .
Prior to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, Bush focused on weapons of mass destruction and stated the U.S. goal in straightforward terms.
“Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament. And in order to disarm, it would mean regime change,” Bush said at a news conference two weeks before he took the nation to war.
“And our mission won’t change,” Bush continued. “Our mission is precisely what I just stated.”
Six weeks later, speaking to workers at an Army tank plant in Ohio, the goal seemed to expand.
“Our mission — besides removing the regime that threatened us, besides ending a place where the terrorists could find a friend, besides getting rid of weapons of mass destruction — our mission has been to bring humanitarian aid and restore basic services and put this country, Iraq, on the road to self- government.”

Read the rest of the news analysis here.

Kerry Acknowledges "Inarticulate Moment"

The Associated Press reports that Kerry acknowledges an inarticulate moment when he tried to explain his vote against the $87 billion for the war in Afghanistan and Iraq by saying:

“I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it.”

From California Yankee.

Kerrry Says We Should Not Have Gone To War In Iraq

ABCNEWS.com has posted a transcript of an excerpt from Diane Sawyer’s interview with Kerry, which is being broadcast on ABC’s “Good Morning America:”

DIANE SAWYER: Was the war in Iraq worth it?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: We should not have gone to war knowing the information we know today.

From California Yankee.

CBS Falls for Democrats Draft Hoax E-Mails

CLARIFICATION: The headline is not meant to imply that there is any evidence that the Democrats were responsible for the hoax. Democrats are only responsible for the attempt to introduce a Draft.

From CBS :

In this report, CBS News Correspondent Richard Schlesinger looks at what President Bush and Sen. John Kerry say about the possibilities of reinstituting the military draft.

Beverly Cocco has spent most of her life protecting children in Philadelphia.

She spends most of her time worrying about other people’s kids. But as Election Day approaches, it’s her own two grown sons who Beverly is most worried about.

“I go to bed every night and I pray and I actually get sick to my stomach,” she says. “I’m very worried; I’m scared. I’m absolutely scared; I’m petrified.”

Beverly is petrified about a military draft : and she’s not alone. There’s an undercurrent of anxiety; mass e-mails are circulating among parents worried their kids could be called up.

“I think there’s a good possibility,” Beverly says.

But neither President Bush, nor Sen. John Kerry has said he will re-institute the draft. In fact they both say they won’t.

Kerry says, “I will give us a foreign policy that absolutely makes it unnecessary to have a draft for this country.”

Kerry says he’ll try to get allies of the U.S. to send troops that could relieve American soldiers.

The Bush campaign says expecting great numbers of foreign troops to help out is pure fantasy. The president wants to train more Iraqi troops to take over for the Americans. And, he says, despite the war on terror, there will be no draft.

“The war on terror will continue,” says the president. “It’s going to take a while and no, we don’t need a draft.”

But Beverly’s not buying it. She’s a Republican, but also a single-issue voter.

Would she vote for a Democrat? “Absolutely,” she says. “I would vote for Howdy Doody if I thought it would keep my boys home and safe.”

In fact, there are at least three votes in this house riding on the draft: Beverly’s and her sons’ Carmen and Nick.

Are her sons worried about being drafted? “Yeah,” says Nick. “It’s the talk; the talk’s there. Though people aren’t actually coming out and saying it, it’s there.”

What worries the Coccos is the continuing need for more troops in dangerous places. And the machinery for a draft is already in place: all men have to register when they turn 18.

The head of the Selective Service believes he could start drafting people quickly.

“I think we could do it in less than six months if we got the call,” says Selective Service Director Jack Martin.

This time, Martin says there would be no long deferments for college students and a lot more people could be eligible for the draft than before: men and women ages 18 to 26 could be called up.

There hasn’t been a draft since 1973, but that’s not much comfort to Beverly Cocco.

So she is keeping a sharp eye on the political traffic. She’s a Bush supporter today, but if she doesn’t like what she hears between now and November, she could easily cross over.

The e-mails (whose text is not available on the CBS site) referred to read as follows:

From:    [omitted]@usdoj.gov
Subject: Military  Draft expected to start July 15, 2005
Date:    Tue, 15 Jun 2004

Draft expected to start July 15, 2005

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program’s initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 — just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public’s attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. Details and links follow.

Even those voters who currently support us. Actions abroad may still object to this move, knowing their own children or grandchildren will not have a say about whether to fight. Not that it should make a difference, but this plan, among other things, eliminates higher education as a shelter and includes women in the draft

The draft $28 million has been added to the 2004 selective service system (sss) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation.

Please see website: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html to view the sss annual performance plan - fiscal year 2004. The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.. Though this is an unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld’s prediction of a “long, hard slog” in Iraq and Afghanistan [and a permanent state of war on “terrorism”] proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

Congress brought twin bills, S. 89 and HR 163 forward this year, entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, “to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons [age 18—26] in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.” These active bills currently sit in the committee on armed services.
http://www.hslda.org/legislation/national/2003/s89/default.asp

S. 89—Universal National Service Act of 2003

Action Requested:
None at this time. HSLDA’s National Center is tracking this legislation.

Background:
Official purpose: A bill to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

The language of this bill mandates a national service obligation for every U.S. citizen and permanent resident, aged 18-26. It authorizes the President to establish both the number of people to be selected for military service, and the means of selection. Additionally, the measure requires those not selected specifically for military service to perform their national service obligation in a civilian capacity for at least two years.

H.R.163
Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

——————————-

From RatherBiased.com :

CBS reporter Richard Schlesinger used debunked internet hoax emails
[…]
Schlesinger did not disclose that Cocco is a chapter president of an advocacy group called People Against the Draft (PAD) which, in addition to opposing any federal conscriptions, seeks to establish a “peaceful, rational foreign policy” by bringing all U.S. troops out of Iraq.
[…]
Also left out of the CBS story was the fact that while there are two bills in Congress that are seeking to reestablish the draft, both of them (S-89 and HR-163) are sponsored exclusively by Democrats and have been pronounced DOA by the Republican leadership.

UPDATE: It has been suggested that CBS may not have fallen for any ‘hoax’, but may have deliberately intended to mislead viewers by omitting extremely relevant facts. Given recent events, the fact that even the most simple and easy search on the Internet would have revealed the e-mails to be bogus should not be viewed as evidence that CBS intended to mislead, merely that they don’t bother checking any of their evidence.

Kerry Campaign Retracts Assault Rifle Claim

From Outdoor Life (October) :

An exclusive interview with the two presidential candidates on gun rights, conservation and other issues that affect your hunting and fishing.

September 2004
[…]
OL: Are you a gun owner? If so, what is your favorite gun?

Bush: Yes. My favorite gun is a Weatherby, Athena 20-gauge (over/under).

Kerry: My favorite gun is the M-16 that saved my life and that of my crew in Vietnam. I don’t own one of those now, but one of my reminders of my service is a Communist Chinese assault rifle.

From the New York Times September 26 :

Senator John Kerry, a hunter who supported the recently expired assault weapons ban, frequently tells audiences he has never met anyone who wanted to use an AK-47 to shoot a deer. But it is not clear what Mr. Kerry does with the Chinese assault rifle he told Outdoor Life magazine he kept in his personal collection.
[…]
Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association - which has given Mr. Kerry “F” ratings throughout his career and backs Mr. Bush’s re-election - said the Outdoor Life comment made Mr. Kerry’s support of the assault weapons ban disingenuous.

”It’s O.K. for John Kerry to own these kinds of firearms, but it’s not O.K. for John Q. Public?” Mr. Arulanandam said, noting that if Mr. Kerry brought the gun home from the war as a souvenir he could be subject to court-martial. “He certainly owes people an explanation as to why there’s a double standard.”

Stephen P. Halbrook, a gun rights lawyer who has argued several cases before the Supreme Court, said the most common Chinese assault rifles, known as SKS clones, were not among the 19 models banned under the 1994 law. But some SKS’s have magazines holding more than 10 rounds, which violates a Massachusetts law against large-capacity weapons, Mr. Halbrook said. If the gun is fully automatic, Mr. Halbrook said, it is illegal in Massachusetts and would require a federal permit if Mr. Kerry kept it at one of his homes in Pennsylvania and Idaho.

Such permits are not public records.

Bob Ricker, a former N.R.A. lawyer who is now a consultant for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said he was not worried by Mr. Kerry’s answer because “he knows a lot about firearms and he’s also one of the most credible individuals when it comes to talking about gun-violence prevention and what it takes to keep weapons of war off the street.”

From the New York Times of September 27 :

Senator John Kerry’s campaign said yesterday that Mr. Kerry did not own a Chinese assault rifle, as he was quoted as saying in Outdoor Life magazine, but a single-bolt-action military rifle, blaming aides who filled out the magazine’s questionnaire on his behalf for the error.

Michael Meehan, a spokesman for the campaign, said Mr. Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, owns two guns, a double-barreled 12-gauge shotgun and the rifle, which Mr. Meehan said Mr. Kerry “keeps as a relic” and had never fired. Mr. Meehan said the gun had no make or model markings on it and that Mr. Kerry “got it from a friend years ago,” adding that such rifles were first manufactured in Russia more than 100 years ago and were used by the North Koreans and the Vietcong.

The “Rifling” or grooves in a rifle barrel are there to impart spin. The latest, corrected version from the Kerry Campiagn makes it quite clear that it may have been from Vietnam (or even Korea or Cambodia), but was given to the Senator by a friend, so no crime was committed (by Kerry, anyway). And it wasn’t his fault, it was some staffer. And there are no markings on the weapon so it can’t be traced.
Given the “100 year old design” claim, it may be a Mosin-Nagant M1891 or one of its many variants, such as the Chinese type 55. Though most “M91”s have all sorts of serial numbers on various parts in unlikely places, e.g. at the magazine base….

Greens, Libertarians holding own debate on Thursday

Bush / Cheney Offers Real-Time Debate Response ... To Bloggers

This came via email today from Bush / Cheney:

Today, Bush-Cheney ‘04 announced the launch of www.DebateFacts.com, which will set the record straight on John Kerry’s shifting positions and baseless assertions during the presidential debates, providing real-time responses to Kerry’s vacillation, defeatism and personal attacks.

On Thursday night, you can be a part of setting the record straight.

DebateFacts.com features a live newsfeed for bloggers. This feed will update throughout the debates. Each time John Kerry says something false or inaccurate, you’ll get the facts delivered to you and your readers instantly.

To get your Live Debate Facts feed, go to:

http://www.georgewbush.com/debatefacts/DebateFeed.aspx

The debate feed is available in two sizes: a horizontal feed to insert directly into your posts live-blogging the debates, or a vertical feed you can put in your site’s navigation. Either way, all you need to do is cut and paste a single line of code into your site, and you’re done.

Don’t wait… put the feed on your site today, and be ready for Thursday night’s debate!

http://www.georgewbush.com/debatefacts/DebateFeed.aspx

Speaking of which, we’ll be opening the chat room during each debate, and will post instructions as we near the 30th.

Flood of New Voters Register

From The Australian :

New US voters are flooding local election offices with paperwork, registering in significantly higher numbers than four years ago as interest in the presidential election runs high and an array of activist groups recruit would-be voters who could prove critical come November 2.

Cleveland has seen nearly twice as many new voters register so far as compared with 2000; Philadelphia is having its biggest boom in new voters in 20 years; and counties are bringing in temporary workers and employees from other agencies to help process all the new registration forms.

Nationwide figures aren’t yet available, but anecdotal evidence shows an upswing in many places, often urban but some rural.
[…]
Some examples, from interviews with state and county officials across the country:

- New registered voters in Miami-Dade County, a crucial Florida county in 2000, grew by 65 per cent through mid-September, compared with 2000.

- New registered voters jumped nearly 150 per cent in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) in Ohio, one of the most hard-fought states this year.

And that’s with weeks left until registration deadlines fall, beginning in October.

Curtis Gans at the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate said a clear national picture won’t emerge until more applications are processed next month.
[…]
Oklahoma officials said they had 16,000 new Republican registrations, 15,000 new Democrats and 3500 new independents. In Oregon, where new registrations grew by 4 per cent from January through September 1, Democrats outregistered Republicans two-to-one.

No European Help For Kerry

The Financial Times reports that French and German government officials say they will not significantly increase military assistance in Iraq even if Kerry wins the election.

From California Yankee.

Debate Prep Began With Yale Professor

The New York Times reports that President Bush and Kerry shared a common oratory teacher and debate coach at Yale.

From California Yankee.

Washington Post-ABC News Poll - Bush By 6

The Washington Post reports that a new Washington Post-ABC News Poll finds that President Bush maintains maintains a solid 6% lead over Kerry:

Likely Voters
Bush 51
Kerry 45
Nader 1

Registered Voters
Bush 51
Kerry 44
Nader 2

The poll was conducted September 23-26, 2004 and has a margin of error of ±3 percent for registered voters.

From California Yankee.

USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll - Bush By 8

USA Today reports that the latest the USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds President Bush leads Kerry by 8 points among likely voters:

Likely Voters
Bush 52
Kerry 44
Nader 3

Registered Voters
Bush 53
Kerry 42
Nader 3

The poll was conducted September 24-26, 2004 and has a margin of error of ±3 percent.

From California Yankee.

Transcript of the President's Interview with Bill O'Reilly

Courtesy Fox News. This is part I of the interview. Part II will air tomorrow evening, part III on Wednesday.

——-
This is a partial transcript from the September 27, 2004 edition of “The O’Reilly Factor,” that has been edited for clarity.

Watch Part II and III of the interview on Tuesday, September 28 and Wednesday, September 29 at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET! Catch “The O’Reilly Factor” weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the “Radio Factor” weekdays on Westwood One.

BILL O‘REILLY, HOST: Okay. First of all, I want to thank you for talking with me.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH : [chuckles]

O’REILLY: So few people will.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, there’s, uh, it’s a big gamble on my part.

O’REILLY: No, it isn’t, not really though. You, we talked four and a half years ago,

PRESIDENT BUSH: I’m teasing.

O’REILLY: Uh, yeah, when you,

PRESIDENT BUSH: I, I enjoy, I enjoy how you interview people, and I uh, appreciate you giving me the chance to come on and have what we say in Texas, just a visit.

O’REILLY: Yeah. We’re going to have a visit here. I’ve got fifteen questions for you. If they’re dumb, tell me they’re dumb. Because the audience will like that.

PRESIDENT BUSH: [Chuckles]

O’REILLY: If they’re dumb questions, look that’s just dumb. Um, the first one is, according to a poll taken by the Coalition Authority (search) last spring, only five percent of the Iraqi people see the United States as liberators. Are you surprised they don’t appreciate the American sacrifice more?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I, I think they’re beginning to, appreciate the sacrifice, because the country is getting better. It’s tougher than heck right now, because Zarqawi (search) and some of these former Baathists are killing innocent Iraqis and killing our soldiers in order to try to get us to leave. Um, I also saw a poll where it said by far the vast majority of the Iraqis believe the world is getting better. And that’s positive. In other words, people are beginning to see progress. Electricity is better, schools are opening, hospitals are running. Um, I think when it’s all said and done, the Iraqis are going to look back and say thank God for America.

O’REILLY: How long is it going to take before that happens, do you think?

PRESIDENT BUSH: You know, it’s uh, as soon as possible. Now, I think the elections are going to have uh, uh you know, a very positive effect, and they take place in January, and, but the people want to vote.

O’REILLY: But can they vote when people are being blown up,

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah.

O’REILLY: And these guys are threatening them, then they vote,

PRESIDENT BUSH: That’s when you’re supposed to vote. You’ve got to stand tough with these terrorists. You cannot allow the terrorists to dictate whether or not a society can be free or not. Do you remember what happened in Afghanistan when the Taliban pulled the four women off the bus and killed them because they had voter registration cards? I think there had been about three million Afghan citizens who had registered at this point in time. A lot of people said, well, the elections look like they’ve got to be over in Afghanistan, because the Taliban is, too violent to allow the elections to go forward. Today ten million citizens, [OVERLAPPING VOICES] in that country have registered to vote, forty percent of whom are women, which is a powerful statistic.

O’REILLY: The South Vietnamese didn’t fight for their freedom, which is why they don’t have it today.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah.

O’REILLY: Do you think the Iraqis are going to fight for their freedom?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Absolutely.

O’REILLY: You do.

PRESIDENT BUSH: No question in my mind, they will, you bet. I was with Prime Minister Allawi (search) yesterday, he is a tough guy. He is a strong leader. He believes the future of Iraq is the future of freedom, and he tells me that, you know that these places where they go bomb the recruits, the people trying to sign up to serve in the army or the police, the next day, more recruits come.

O’REILLY: Okay.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Because people want to defend their country. I believe that. You know why I believe that, and this is really important, uh, uh, it’s because, I believe everybody yearns to be free. I believe Muslims yearn to be free. And I, and this is tough, look, no question it’s tough times. But if we send mixed signals, if we waver, the times will be tougher. That’s what the terrorists are watching, they’re watching us like hawks.

O’REILLY: What happened to Saddam’s chemical arsenal, do you know?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No. I don’t. We thought we’d have stockpiles, uh, we do know he had the capability of making weapons. And that capability could have been passed on to terrorists, and that was a risk, after 9/11, we could not afford to take.

O’REILLY: No I understand that. But you, to this day, don’t know what happened to his chemical weapons. He didn’t tell us, and, and,

PRESIDENT BUSH: No. Not yet.

O’REILLY: He hasn’t given us much, has he?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, he, well he doesn’t have anything, you know, doesn’t have anything to, to gain by giving us much, I mean, he’s, he’s going to go on trial, and the Iraqis will lay out a case, and, you know, I mean, why would he, why would he tell the truth?

O’REILLY: “The Wall Street Journal” says, and that’s a conservative paper, that uh, the Defense Department and the Pentagon wasn’t aggressive enough in getting al-Sadr and then crushing Fallujah.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah.

O’REILLY: Is the “Journal” wrong?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I, I think this uh, I think that the, government of Iraq, Allawi, did a good job in Najaf with Sadr. In other words, they now control the shrines, and they did so in a way that he, Allawi, thought would be best for the political process. In other words, there’s a dual track here. There’s a political process going forward, and a security operation going forward. And the two must be parallel, and uh, Allawi made the decision that the best operation in Najaf uh would be to, the way we handled it, and uh, if they’re saying that maybe last fall we should have moved on Sadr, it’s a judgment call that you know, history will have to look back on.

O’REILLY: Fallujah? Should we have crushed it when we could have?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, there again, there was a dual track with uh, a political process going forward, a lot of people on the ground there thought that if we’d have gone into Fallujah at the time, the uh, interim government would not have been established, and if the government would not have been established, we wouldn’t have been able to transfer sovereignty. I happen to think the transfer of sovereignty is a key moment in this, history of a free Iraq. The reason I believe that is that the Iraq people are going to follow uh Iraqi leadership, not U.S. leadership. And uh, Prime Minister Allawi’s been there for about two and a half months, nearly three months, he’s getting his feet on the ground, he’s establishing a government, they’re training police, they’re training army, they’re beginning to move out in, in places like Sumaria and Najaf in order to make the place a more peaceful, peaceful country.

O’REILLY: The mission accomplished statement in May 2003, if you had to do it all over again, would you not have done it?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Uh, well first of all, the statement said, Thank you for be, serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, thank you for being on one of the largest, longest cruises in our nation’s history. Thank you for serving our country, and we’ve still got tough work in Iraq. Now I’m, I’m going to go and thank our troops every chance I get.

O’REILLY: But the press spinned it, you know how they spinned it.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, they spin everything.

O’REILLY: Me too.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, [chuckles] I understand, you know, maybe you deserve it more than me, but nevertheless, [chuckles] look I, I,

O’REILLY: [OVERLAPPING VOICES] You’ve taken some heat for that.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I take heat for a lot of things, and uh,

O’REILLY: Would you do it again?

PRESIDENT BUSH: You mean have the sign up there?

O’REILLY: No, no, but go in there with the flight jacket,

PRESIDENT BUSH: Absolutely.

O’REILLY: You would.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Of course. I’m saying to the troops, on this carrier and elsewhere, thanks for serving America. Absolutely.

O’REILLY: Okay.

PRESIDENT BUSH: And by the way, those sol, those uh sailors and airmen, loved seeing the Commander in Chief.

O’REILLY: Oh, that’s [INAUDIBLE]

PRESIDENT BUSH: These kids had been on a very long cruise. They’d been on a cruise to both, in two theaters of war now, Afghanistan and Iraq. I flew out there, and said, thanks. Thanks on behalf of a grateful nation. You bet I’d do it again.

O’REILLY: This is really a tough one.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Okay. [chuckles]

O’REILLY: Iran. Uh, said yesterday, hey, we’re going to develop this nuclear stuff, we don’t care what you think. You ready to use military force against Iran if they continue to defy the world on nuclear?

PRESIDENT BUSH: My hope is that we can solve this diplomatically.

O’REILLY: But if you can’t.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, let me try to solve it diplomatically first. All options are on the table, of course, in any situation. But diplomacy is the first option.

O’REILLY: Would you allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon?

PRESIDENT BUSH: We, we are working our hearts out so that they don’t develop a nuclear weapon, and the best way to do so is to continue to keep international pressure on them.

O’REILLY: Is it conceivable that you would allow them to develop a nuclear weapon?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Uh, no, we’ve made it clear, our position is that they won’t have a nuclear weapon.

O’REILLY: Period.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah.

O’REILLY: A “Time” magazine investigation says, three million illegal aliens crossed the Mexican border, and we talked about this four and a half years,

PRESIDENT BUSH: We have, I know, it’s a issue that you’re concerned about.

O’REILLY: Every year, three and a half million illegals come over. Why can’t the federal government control that?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, as you know, as the governor of Texas, I was very aware of this issue, there is a long border, that makes it hard to control. We have beefed up places along the border to try to stop the process of, of, of uh, of uh,

O’REILLY: With all due respect though, it’s not working.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well,

O’REILLY: Three million people.

PRESIDENT BUSH: It’s working a little better, they’re doing a pretty good job down in Arizona, which is the main border crossing, but I was trying to get my words here for a minute. Trying to give you some facts that would, I think there’s a thousand more border patrol agents along the border, we’re modernizing border techniques, we’re using better surveillance methods to stop this, crossing at the border. Now look, people are coming up because they want to work. You know, that, family values don’t stop at the border.

O’REILLY: Absolutely,

PRESIDENT BUSH: If you can make fifty cents in the interior of Mexico, and five bucks in uh, the interior of the United States, you’re coming for the five bucks, and they’re poor.

O’REILLY: Ninety percent of them are, but ten percent are bad guys.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, look, look,

O’REILLY: A lot of bad guys coming here.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I don’t know how you got the ten percent number, maybe,

O’REILLY: The border patrol you know, incarceration, violent crime, that,

PRESIDENT BUSH: No question about it. It is a ter, serious issue. I happen to believe the best way to enhance the border is to have temporary worker cards available for people. And uh, I think it’s best for the employers who are employing these people, I think it’s best for the employees that are trying to find work. I think the long-term solution for this issue on our border is for Mexico to grow a middle class, that’s why I believe in NAFTA (search),

O’REILLY: We’ll be in the grave.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I don’t think so, it’s happening. Look, you, I wish I could have taken you down there and shown you the, the northern tier of states in Mexico, uh, ten years ago compared to today. I mean, it, it’s happening.

O’REILLY: You,

PRESIDENT BUSH: Free trade helps lift, lives, free trade develops commerce, free trade gives people a chance to realize their dreams. And so long as the wage differential is as big as it is, and so long as moms and dads feel the, necessity to feed their children, they’re going to come and try to make a living.

O’REILLY: So you’re not going to military militarize the border to stop,

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, we’re going to use the border patrol and beef it up, and make it, give it better technologies and better equipment to do its job.

O’REILLY: Okay. You know a lot of people are not going to like that answer, you know that.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well it’s a, a truthful answer.

O’REILLY: Okay. Um,

PRESIDENT BUSH: I mean, as opposed as to what, putting a military on the border,
O’REILLY: Yeah, military to back up the border patrol, to just stop the, the, rampant,

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, I think the best way to do it is to give the border patrol the assets it needs to do its job.

——

For an alternative take on the interview, try here.

Carter Decries Florida Election Conditions

Former President Jimmy Carter says that despite changes designed to eliminate voting problems in Florida — where the disputed 2000 presidential election was decided by only a few hundred votes — conditions for a fair election in that state still don’t exist.

“The disturbing fact is that a repetition of the problems of 2000 now seems likely,” Carter wrote in an opinion piece published Monday in the Washington Post.

[…]

Carter, citing the experience of his Carter Center in monitoring international elections, said “some basic international requirements for a fair election are missing in Florida.” Most significant, he said, were requirements that a nonpartisan electoral commission or official organize and conduct the electoral process and that voting procedures be uniform for all citizens.

Read more…

Miami, We Have A Problem

On Saturday ABC’s “Noted Now” reported that the first presidential debate, scheduled for Thursday in Miami, could be canceled. The Commission on Presidential Debates is reluctant to sign the 32-page legal document negotiated by the Bush and Kerry campaigns regarding the rules that will govern the 2004 debates.

From California Yankee.

Six out of Eight Klingons Prefer Kerry

..and the other two want Satan as a write-in.

With the various partisan brawls going on, tempers rising and people getting steamed up about important issues, an article like this comes along at just the right time.

From the Willamette Week :

Even as John Kerry struggles to establish national-security credentials nationally, an exclusive WW straw poll shows his campaign dominating one skeptical, warlike demographic: Klingons.

The poll, conducted when the DVD release of the Star Trek fan documentary Trekkies 2 attracted Portland’s Klingon community to Tower Records on Southeast 102nd Avenue, may spell trouble for President George W. Bush.

The incumbent has staked his campaign on the war on terror. But those who speak the language of the Trek warrior race—known to disdain dishonor, or quvHa’ghach—seem alienated by Iraq and other issues.

According to the poll of eight local Klingons, a whopping 75 percent support the Democratic nominee.

Two Klingons polled—or 25 percent—said they planned to write in Satan.

Bush scored an abysmal zero percent in the poll.

“A good war is based on honor, not deception,” says K’tok (Earth name: Clyde Lewis), a 40-year-old Klingon from Lair Hill. “The first warrior, President Bush, deceived us all with this war.”

Portland Klingon speakers are increasingly influential. Last year, Multnomah County’s mental-health services opened a search for a Klingon interpreter to work with speakers of the language.* Though the Klingons polled all appeared to be registered voters, they emulate an unfamiliar political system.

“On the home world, if there had been a contested election between Gore and Bush, the honorable thing would be for Gore to kill Bush,” explained Khraanik (Earth name: Jason Lewis), a 38-year-old from Southeast Portland. “Or the other way around. And then ascend to the head of the High Council.”

It’s too early for Kerry to chill the ceremonial bloodwine, but Portland Klingons are clearly warming to the cerebral Massachusetts Democrat.

“Kerry has shown his prowess,” says 33-year-old Neqha (Earth name: Eric King) of Tigard. “He saved his fellow warrior under the gun, and has been commended and awarded medals.”

Neither the Bush nor Kerry campaigns were immediately available for comment on the poll results.

[* No, we’re not making this up.]

Bush Volunteered For Vietnam

Knoxville’s WVLT Volunteer TV reports that when he was the National Guard President Bush volunteered for Vietnam:

One of the criticisms leveled at the President is that he sought guard service to keep him from serving in Vietnam.

Morrisey says, “not so.”

“The Air Force, in their ultimate wisdom, assembled a group of 102’s and took them to Southeast Asia. Bush volunteered to go. But he needed to have 500 [flight] hours, but he only had just over 300 hours so he wasn’t eligible to go,” Morrisey recalls.

Despite that, Lieutenant Bush stayed busy.

“He flew in active air defense missions, training missions. Day, night, regardless of inclement weather,” Morrisey says.

Colonel Morrisey assured us that to the best of his knowledge Lieutenant Bush was treated like any other officer in the Texas Air National Guard.

From California Yankee via Betsy’s Page.

An Open Apology To Our Readers

After reading … and taking part in … the comments on the “presenile dementia” post, it’s clear to me that I need to apologize to our readers in general, and to a few specific readers in particular.

The first apology is to the readers in general not for posting that article and letter from The Atlantic, but for how I did so. I did a poor job of providing context, and that lack of context created a vacuum of attribution that was quickly filled by some of our readers … much of whom inferred that I was furthering an anti-Bush bias (in the best) or whom questioned my patriotism (in the worst).

Having had a night to think about it (and I have to tell you, when you’re laying in bed at 4 a.m. thinking about something like this that’s supposed to be a hobby, it might be time to question your level of investment), I should have set up the post differently, perhaps with something along the lines of this:

In reading the past two month’s Atlantics I was quite surprised to see that some people are invoking hypotheses about a biological cause for the president’s occasional malapropisms, and was even more surprised to see the Atlantic print a letter to the editor that attempts to legitimize such a claim, even though the physician writing the letter has made no examination of the president.

I want to post both because I think both … that one would make the claim and that the Atlantic would post the letter … are newsworthy—not because I agree with either, but because they demonstrate the state of the campaign, and because I think the Atlantic is out on a limb with the letter. I do so in keeping with our “we post, you decide (and discuss)” policy, but know that I’m distancing myself from the content itself. I’m looking forward to the fact-checking and the debate on this, as I expect our readers to clarify the matter (as they typically do).

I didn’t lead with that context because I posted this from work, in the middle of a busy day, and had about 3 minutes to dash something off.

In retrospect, I wish I had.

So I apologize for the poor context, and I apologize for tarnishing this space, if in fact, in your mind, I did.

Now for the second apology, which I extend to TexasGal and CERDIP, two loyal, if strident, readers. They reacted to a lack of context I created, and I became defensive as a result of their commentary. It was I who pushed the bounds of civil and respectful behavior, and for that I’m sorry to both of them. It’s a lot of work, managing this place … a labor of love (one in which, as I suggest above, I might be too personally vested). We try quite hard to get it “just right,” and while I know we’ll never satisfy everyone … nor do we want to … some days sharp feedback is more difficult to take than others. That’s my problem, not theirs, and again, I apologize for the stridency I exhibited in return.

So. I hope they, and you, will accept. I learned early on in life that all of us are a hell of a lot smarter than one of us, and the feedback here tells me the greater wisdom lies with the group. As with so many things from Command Post over the past year and a half, another chance for me to learn, and hopefully, be better as a result.

As I’ve said from day one, “thanks for reading the Post.”

Bush's Lead Narrows in Latest Time Poll

Reuters reports that President Bush leads Kerry by 6 percentage points in a new Time Magazine poll:

Forty-eight percent of likely voters surveyed said they would vote for Bush, and 42 percent said they would vote for Kerry, according to the magazine’s latest poll. Five percent said they would vote for Ralph Nader.

From California Yankee.

Bush to blame for Hurricanes, Democrats to Ban Bible

From Talon :

Attempting to take political advantage of the devastating hurricanes that have hit Florida and the southeastern section of the United States in the past few weeks, liberal political action group MoveOn.org is saying that President George W. Bush is to blame for “making extreme weather stronger.”

In an e-mail to supporters, MoveOn.org rhetorically asks “why such extreme weather” has taken place with Hurricanes Charley, Frances, and Ivan causing billions of dollars in property damage and loss of life.

Coincidentally, Space Daily criticised a recent conference of environmental experts for discussing a truly stupid idea.:

The group included noted skeptics Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the George Marshall Institute in Washington, D.C., along with three state climatologists and several university professors, and focused on the recent hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico.

With the occurrence of such severe weather events - and regardless of the type of event, flood, heat wave, blizzard, cold spell or tropical storm - news stories seem to mention global warming as a possible cause, the group said in a news release.
[…]
Contrary to this assertion, neither the media nor other climate scientists are attributing the force or frequency of hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan or Jeanne to global warming.

So, having set up this straw man, the skeptics had little trouble knocking it down.

In contrast, CBS is in a Rlather over a single over-the-top graphic :

Campaign literature mailed by the Republican National Committee warns voters in two states that the Bible will be prohibited and men will marry men if “liberals” win in November.

The New York Times reported that the mass mailing was sent to voters in Arkansas and West Virginia, and was part of a GOP effort to mobilize religious voters.

The literature shows a Bible with the word “BANNED” across it and a photo of a man, on his knees, placing a ring on the hand of another man with the word “ALLOWED.” The mailing tells West Virginians to “vote Republican to protect our families” and defeat the “liberal agenda.”

The Times said RNC spokeswoman Christine Iverson had confirmed that the GOP had sent out the mailings.
[…]
Jim Jordan, a spokesman for America Coming Together, an anti-Bush group, described the mailing as “standard-issue Republican hate-mongering.”

Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards issued a statement saying that President Bush “should condemn the practice immediately and tell everyone associated with the campaign to never use tactics like this again,” the Times reported.

Bush blasts Kerry for remarks on the Allawi

From the Fort Worth Star Telegram:

President Bush hit back hard at Sen. John Kerry on Friday for what he called Kerry’s attacks on Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, who stood by the president’s side this week as steadfastly as a member of the Bush campaign.

“This great man came to our country to talk about how he’s risking his life for a free Iraq, which helps America, and Senator Kerry held a press conference and questioned Prime Minister Allawi’s credibility,” Bush said at a speech in the southern Wisconsin town of Janesville. “You can’t lead this country if your ally in Iraq feels like you question his credibility. The message ought to be to the Iraqi people: ‘We support you.’ The message ought to be loud and clear: ‘We’ll stand with you if you do the hard work.’”

Bush was referring to Kerry’s remarks Thursday saying Allawi was contradicting himself by asserting that terrorists in Iraq were on the defensive, after saying foreign fighters were coming into his country from across the border.

Prepare The Lawyers

John Fund on post-election 2004:

The Bush and Kerry campaigns are spending unprecedented millions on TV ads. But the real battle that could decide this election may be fought by the squadrons of lawyers both sides have hired to prepare Florida-style challenges to the results in any close state. Once again, America’s sloppy, fraud-prone voting system could turn Election Day into an Election Month of court challenges.

“If you think of election problems as akin to forest fires, the woods are no drier than they were in 2000, but many more people have matches,” says Doug Chapin, director of the nonpartisan Election Reform Information Project.

Bush Prepping In Crawford

KFOR reports that the president is spending the weekend in Crawford, preparing for the upcoming debates.

Debate Invitations Sent

WAVY (yes, WAVY) reports that the Commission on Presidential Debates has issued its formal invitations. How do you get invited: get at least 15 percent of the support in an average of five national polls. Only Bush and Kerry met the test.

You may visit the Commission on Presidential Debates here.

Does George W. Bush Have Presenile Dementia?

In the July/August Atlantic James Fallows has an excellent piece about the upcoming debates … an article worth reading in particular for its review of Bush’s not-well-understood history of performing well in debates, especially in situations when he’s expected to lose (as his defeats of collegiate debate scholar Ann Richards in the Texas Gubernatorial election demonstrates).

Good news for you: this article is among the few the Atlantic pieces online free, and you may read it here.

What caught my eye in the article, however, was this passage:

Yolette Garcia, who as the executive producer at KERA-TV, in Dallas, had supervised negotiations for the Bush-Richards debate, says that in those days Bush was noted for his poise and ease in public appearances—including the informal Q&As he has tried to avoid as President. “You never saw him in an awkward situation as governor,” she told me. “You expected he’d know the right thing to say.”

Obviously, Bush doesn’t sound this way as President, and there is no one conclusive explanation for the change. I have read and listened to speculations that there must be some organic basis for the President’s peculiar mode of speech—a learning disability, a reading problem, dyslexia or some other disorder that makes him so uncomfortable when speaking off the cuff. The main problem with these theories is that through his forties Bush was perfectly articulate. George Lakoff tried to convince me that the change was intentional. As a way of showing deep-down NASCAR-type manliness, according to Lakoff, Bush has deliberately made himself sound as clipped and tough as John Wayne. Moreover, in Lakoff’s view, the authenticity of this stance depends on Bush’s consistency in presenting it. So even if he is still capable of speaking with easy eloquence, he can’t afford to let the mask slip.

I say: Maybe. Clearly Bush has been content to let his opponents, including the press, think him a numbskull. Even his unfortunate puzzled-chimp expression when trying to answer questions may be useful: his friends don’t mind, and his enemies continue to underestimate him. But to me the more plausible overall explanation is the sheer change in scale from being governor of Texas to being President of the United States.

Then, in the current edition of The Atlantic, to which I subscribe, there is this letter to the editor:

James Fallows’s description of John Kerry’s debating skills (“When George Meets John,” July/August Atlantic) was interesting, but what was most remarkable was Fallows’s documentation of President Bush’s mostly overlooked changes over the past decade—specifically, “the striking decline in his sentence-by-sentence speaking skills.” Fallows points to “speculations that there must be some organic basis for the President’s peculiar mode of speech—a learning disability, a reading problem, dyslexia or some other disorder,” but correctly concludes, “The main problem with these theories is that through his forties Bush was perfectly articulate.”

I, too, felt that something organic was wrong with President Bush, most probably dyslexia. But I was unaware of what Fallows pointed out so clearly: that Bush’s problems have been developing slowly, and that just a decade ago he was an articulate debater, “artful indeed in steering questions and challenges to his desired subjects,” who “did not pause before forcing out big words, as he so often does now, or invent mangled new ones.” Consider, in contrast, the present: “the informal Q&As he has tried to avoid,” “Bush’s recent faltering performances,” “his unfortunate puzzled-chimp expression when trying to answer questions,” “his stalling, defensive pose when put on the spot,” “speaking more slowly and less gracefully.”

Not being a professional medical researcher and clinician, Fallows cannot be faulted for not putting two and two together. But he was 100 percent correct in suggesting that Bush’s problem cannot be “a learning disability, a reading problem, [or] dyslexia,” because patients with those problems have always had them. Slowly developing cognitive deficits, as demonstrated so clearly by the President, can represent only one diagnosis, and that is “presenile dementia”! Presenile dementia is best described to nonmedical persons as a fairly typical Alzheimer’s situation that develops significantly earlier in life, well before what is usually considered old age. It runs about the same course as typical senile dementias, such as classical Alzheimer’s—to incapacitation and, eventually, death, as with President Ronald Reagan, but at a relatively earlier age. President Bush’s “mangled” words are a demonstration of what physicians call “confabulation,” and are almost specific to the diagnosis of a true dementia. Bush should immediately be given the advantage of a considered professional diagnosis, and started on drugs that offer the possibility of retarding the slow but inexorable course of the disease.

Joseph M. Price, M.D.
Carsonville, Mich.

This letter is NOT available online, but I’ve decided to post it here nonetheless … if you want to register with The Atlantic and see it online, you may do so here.

An interesting, if ultimately sorrowful, hypothesis. About presenile dementia: Dorlands Medical Dictionary offers this definition of the affliction:

presenile dementia, that occurring in younger persons, usually in persons age 65 or younger; since most cases are due to Alzheimer’s disease, the term is sometimes used as a synonym of d. of the Alzheimer type, early onset, and has also been used to denote Alzheimer’s disease.

It was difficult to locate anything online about symptoms … any links or information from readers is welcome.

Update: First of all, I’m not saying I BELIEVE this any more than I’ve said I believe any other post we put on this page. As always, our interpretive stance is “we post, you decide.” So please keep that in mind if you’re about to make a personal attribution about me based on this post. I’ve posted a million items on this page favorable to G. W. Bush, and when folks from the left have leveled the “you’re biased” gun at my head I wouldn’t tolerate that attribution either, and I’m not about to invoke (or tolerate) a double-standard now. Thanks.

Now, as to whether this should be on Op/Ed: since it’s not my opinion, and since I’m not editorializing, and since it’s from a respected news publication, I don’t think so. Neither does Michele. Again with a possible double standard: when the first Rathergate items started to fly, they were all opinion or informed opinion, but they appeared on this page because we thought the claim was newsworthy and not editorializing.

If anything, y’all should fact-check the shit out of this and disprove it, if Bush is your guy. And if he’s not, you should hope the fact-checkers turn up diddly.

But for God’s sake: don’t rant at management. We just pay the bills and keep the lights on.

Update 2: This from a very trusted source … I’ll protect his anonymity, but I will say he practiced medicine for 35 years, and has served as a respected member of the international medical community for decades:

Dubbya may be losing it, but the evidence cited has no credibility. The “confabulation” part tells me that the author didn’t know what he was talking about. I’m sure that we can expect a bunch of conspiracy stories next, with Karl Rove and Laura hiding the president’s disability ala Edith Wilson.

So … if we buy the premise that Joseph M. Price, M.D. of Carsonville, Mich. really DOESN‘T know what he’s talking about, doesn’t it seem a bit untoward for the Atlantic to print the letter? Of course, Mr. Anonymous Respected Source above could be wrong (but I doubt it).

In Their Own Words: Allawi, Bush, Kerry

There have been 3 speeches in recent weeks that are worth reading on their own, unfiltered by media spin. So, here they are, in alphabetical order:

• Iraqi Interim Prime minister Iyad Allawi’s address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress. There was also a press conference later.

• U.S. President George W. Bush’s address to the United Nations

• U.S. Democratic Party nominee John Kerry’s recent “What I’d Do About Iraq” speech on Sept. 20.

American Research Group Poll: Bush Leads Pop. Vote; Kerry Leads in E. College

ARG has released their new poll, which is notable for the size of its sample: 600 interviews with likely voters in each state and DC. This is an enormous overall sample, and a very large sample within each state as well.

The results:

• George W. Bush is at 47% and John Kerry is at 46% in the weighted national popular vote.
• Bush leads outside the margin of error in 17 states with 133 electoral votes.
• Kerry leads outside the margin of error in 10 states with 132 electoral votes.
• Bush has any lead in 29 states with 253 electoral votes.
• Kerry has any lead in 20 states with 270 electoral votes.
• Bush and Kerry are tied in Wisconsin and West Virginia.

Flash: Afghan Army In Najaf! (??)

I may or may not love our president, but I often love his candid style. Every once in a while, though, he serves up a softball for those who think his elevator don’t go all the way to th’ top, as he did yesterday.

From yesterday’s Bush / Allawi press conference (FOXNews):

[Bush speaking] The prime minister said something very interesting a while ago and it’s important for the American people to understand. Our strategy is to help the Iraqis help themselves. It’s important that we train Iraqi troops. There are nearly 100,000 troops trained.

The Afghan national army is a part of the army.

By the way, it’s the Afghan national army that went into Najaf and did the work there.

There’s a regular army being trained, a border guard being trained, their police being trained. That’s a key part of our mission.

But I think the world watches America. We’re an influential nation, and everybody watches what we say. And I think it’s very important for the American president to mean what he says.

That’s why I understand that the enemy could misread what I say. That’s why I try to be as clearly as I can. I don’t want them to be emboldened by any confusion or doubt.

I’m pretty sure he meant the Iraqi army, not the Afghan army, just to be clearly …

AP Poll: Bush By 7

The Associated Press reports that the latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll finds President Bush has a 7 point lead among likely voters.

Bush 52
Kerry 45
Nader 1

From California Yankee.

Church role in politics may be expanding without debate

The Bush campaign has been courting church-goers this year, soliciting church directories for potential voters, for example. According to the Christian Science Monitor, the role of religion in the business of politics may be expanding. A movement is afoot in Congress to attach a “Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act” to a bill that does not require debate or even a vote.

More than 130 members of the US House of Representatives want to amend the law that prohibits partisan activity - such as political rallies, fundraisers, distribution of political literature, and direct endorsements from the pulpit - by pastors and houses of worship. They hope to do this by inserting a provision into a bill that is already before a House-Senate conference committee - thus avoiding public debate or votes in either body.

Supporters say the provision is needed to restore free speech to religious leaders. Barring political endorsements from the pulpit curtails the First Amendment rights of pastors, they say.

But opponents argue that it would turn houses of worship into campaign vehicles and possibly reshape the America’s religious and political landscapes in harmful ways. They worry that political endorsements could divide churches, lead to reconfiguring memberships along political lines, adulterate their spiritual purpose and prophetic role as societal consciences, and even perhaps turn their coffers into unregulated channels for campaign financing.

Stealing Elections

I’ve been given a preview copy of John Fund’s new book, Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy. I’ve just begun reading it, but it’s already interested me with a few facts:

• The US ranks 139th out of 163 democracies in the rate of voter participation.

• Philadelphia’s voter rolls have jumped 24% since 1995 at the same time that the city’s population has declined by 13%.

Then there’s this:

Even after Florida 2000, the media tend to downplay or ignore stories of election incompetence, manipulation or theft. Allowing such abuses to vanish into an informational black hole in effect legitimates them. The refusal to insist on simple procedural changes, such as requiring a photo ID at the polls, combined with secure technology and more vigorous prosecutions accelerates our drift toward banana-republic elections.

Hmmmm.

Maybe we (bloggers) can do for voter fraud protection what we’re doing for journalism? I can see it now: a no-advertising, no-revenue site … www.cleanvote2004.com. “Open source election monitoring,” anyone?

Update: I’ve registered www.cleanvote2004.com …

Drudge: Burkett to Sue CBS

Drudge reports Burkett will sue CBS:

CBS DOC SOURCE SET TO SUE NETWORK FOR LIBEL
Wed Sep 22 2004 00:05:20 ET

Bill Burkett, the man identified yesterday by CBS as the source of the controversial documents used in its September 8 “60 Minutes II” report questioning President Bush’s Air National Guard service, plans to sue the network, the NY SUN reports.

Burkett has had “several meetings with lawyers to determine the best course of action.” The planned lawsuit would center on “defamation of character and libel.”

In particular, Burkett is complaining that CBS promised to authenticate the documents:

“Bill Burkett went with CBS News on this over ABC News, the New York Times, and the Washington Post because they promised to work the hardest to protect him and authenticate the documents. ,” Mr.Van Os told the Sun. “Bill leveled with [CBS] about his doubts over the papers, and they promised him they would take their time. They spent all of three days, maybe less, on authentication.”

Via JustOneMinute

Kerry Does 'Top Ten List'

The AP reports on Kerry’s Letterman appearance, including his joke that Dick Cheney could claim the president “as a dependent.”

The list:

Top Ten Bush Tax Proposals:
#10. No estate tax for families with at least two U.S. Presidents.
#9. W-2 form is now Dubya-2 forms.
#8. Under simplified tax code, your refund check goes directly to Halliburton.
#7. Reduced earned income tax credit is so unfair, it makes me want to tear out my lustrous, finely groomed hair.
#6. Attorney General Ashcroft gets to write off U.S. Constitution
#5. Texas Rangers can take business loss for trading Sammy Sosa.
#4. Eliminate all income taxes; just ask Teresa to cover the whole damn thing
#3. Cheney can claim Bush as a dependent
#2. Hundred-dollar penalty if you pronounce it “nuclear” instead of “nucular.”
#1. Bush gets deduction for mortgaging our entire future.

"Bush's Passion For Secrecy"

The Boston Globe:

SOME MAY be tempted to dismiss this column as more self-interested whining from the media, but stick with it — it’s really about the public’s right to know, not the media’s. The Bush administration, resistant to scrutiny even before Sept. 11, has drawn a cloak of secrecy over its official actions that has steadily insulated it from the taxpayers. John Dean, counsel to Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandals, says the administration is using regulations and administrative actions to achieve what it could not get through Congress: an official secrets act.

The Debates As Character Forum

The CS Monitor profiles the upcoming debates as test of character more than policy. The Monitor also opines on the debates here.

Tracking No Child Left Behind

A No Child Left Behind opposition group has created a site to track the issue. From their press release:

A powerful and unique Web site – http://www.nclbgrassroots.org – being launched today is intended to help national policymakers and the news media understand that the controversial No Child Left Behind (NCLB) school reforms are not working as intended and have sparked widespread local opposition.

Featuring more than 500 recent local newspaper articles that can be sorted by state and eight key NCLB topic areas, the ambitious Web site is being launched by Results for America (http://www.ResultsForAmerica.org), a project of the nonprofit and nonpartisan Civil Society Institute. Articles collected in the Web site can be sorted by such issues as: federal intrusion in education policy; narrowing of curriculum; teacher flexibility; class size; funding burden; unintended negative consequences of NCLB; adequate yearly progress (AYP) reporting; and standardized testing.

DNC Chair Issues Statement about CBS Memos

From the DNC website :

Washington, D.C. - In response to false Republican accusations regarding the CBS documents, Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe issued this statement:

“In today’s New York Post, Roger Stone, who became associated with political ‘dirty tricks’ while working for Nixon, refused to deny that he was the source the CBS documents.

“Will Ed Gillespie or the White House admit today what they know about Mr. Stone’s relationship with these forged documents? Will they unequivocally rule out Mr. Stone’s involvement? Or for that matter, others with a known history of dirty tricks, such as Karl Rove or Ralph Reed?”

Hat Tip : Mudville Gazette

Bush Addresses U.N. Assembly

Full text of the speech, via the White House.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen: Thank you for the honor of addressing this General Assembly. The American people respect the idealism that gave life to this organization. And we respect the men and women of the U.N., who stand for peace and human rights in every part of the world. Welcome to New York City, and welcome to the United States of America.

During the past three years, I’ve addressed this General Assembly in a time of tragedy for my country, and in times of decision for all of us. Now we gather at a time of tremendous opportunity for the U.N. and for all peaceful nations. For decades, the circle of liberty and security and development has been expanding in our world. This progress has brought unity to Europe, self-government to Latin America and Asia, and new hope to Africa. Now we have the historic chance to widen the circle even further, to fight radicalism and terror with justice and dignity, to achieve a true peace, founded on human freedom.

The United Nations and my country share the deepest commitments. Both the American Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaim the equal value and dignity of every human life. That dignity is honored by the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, protection of private property, free speech, equal justice, and religious tolerance. That dignity is dishonored by oppression, corruption, tyranny, bigotry, terrorism and all violence against the innocent. And both of our founding documents affirm that this bright line between justice and injustice — between right and wrong — is the same in every age, and every culture, and every nation.

Wise governments also stand for these principles for very practical and realistic reasons. We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace. We know that oppressive governments support terror, while free governments fight the terrorists in their midst. We know that free peoples embrace progress and life, instead of becoming the recruits for murderous ideologies.

Every nation that wants peace will share the benefits of a freer world. And every nation that seeks peace has an obligation to help build that world. Eventually, there is no safe isolation from terror networks, or failed states that shelter them, or outlaw regimes, or weapons of mass destruction. Eventually, there is no safety in looking away, seeking the quiet life by ignoring the struggles and oppression of others.

In this young century, our world needs a new definition of security. Our security is not merely found in spheres of influence, or some balance of power. The security of our world is found in the advancing rights of mankind.

These rights are advancing across the world — and across the world, the enemies of human rights are responding with violence. Terrorists and their allies believe the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the American Bill of Rights, and every charter of liberty ever written, are lies, to be burned and destroyed and forgotten. They believe that dictators should control every mind and tongue in the Middle East and beyond. They believe that suicide and torture and murder are fully justified to serve any goal they declare. And they act on their beliefs.

In the last year alone, terrorists have attacked police stations, and banks, and commuter trains, and synagogues — and a school filled with children. This month in Beslan we saw, once again, how the terrorists measure their success — in the death of the innocent, and in the pain of grieving families. Svetlana Dzebisov was held hostage, along with her son and her nephew — her nephew did not survive. She recently visited the cemetery, and saw what she called the “little graves.” She said, “I understand that there is evil in the world. But what have these little creatures done?”

Members of the United Nations, the Russian children did nothing to deserve such awful suffering, and fright, and death. The people of Madrid and Jerusalem and Istanbul and Baghdad have done nothing to deserve sudden and random murder. These acts violate the standards of justice in all cultures, and the principles of all religions. All civilized nations are in this struggle together, and all must fight the murderers.

We’re determined to destroy terror networks wherever they operate, and the United States is grateful to every nation that is helping to seize terrorist assets, track down their operatives, and disrupt their plans. We’re determined to end the state sponsorship of terror — and my nation is grateful to all that participated in the liberation of Afghanistan. We’re determined to prevent proliferation, and to enforce the demands of the world — and my nation is grateful to the soldiers of many nations who have helped to deliver the Iraqi people from an outlaw dictator.

The dictator agreed in 1991, as a condition of a cease-fire, to fully comply with all Security Council resolutions — then ignored more than a decade of those resolutions. Finally, the Security Council promised serious consequences for his defiance. And the commitments we make must have meaning. When we say “serious consequences,” for the sake of peace, there must be serious consequences. And so a coalition of nations enforced the just demands of the world.

Defending our ideals is vital, but it is not enough. Our broader mission as U.N. members is to apply these ideals to the great issues of our time. Our wider goal is to promote hope and progress as the alternatives to hatred and violence. Our great purpose is to build a better world beyond the war on terror.

Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have established a global fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. In three years the contributing countries have funded projects in more than 90 countries, and pledged a total of $5.6 billion to these efforts. America has undertaken a $15 billion effort to provide prevention and treatment and humane care in nations afflicted by AIDS, placing a special focus on 15 countries where the need is most urgent. AIDS is the greatest health crisis of our time, and our unprecedented commitment will bring new hope to those who have walked too long in the shadow of death.

Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have joined together to confront the evil of trafficking in human beings. We’re supporting organizations that rescue the victims, passing stronger anti-trafficking laws, and warning travelers that they will be held to account for supporting this modern form of slavery. Women and children should never be exploited for pleasure or greed, anywhere on Earth.

Because we believe in human dignity, we should take seriously the protection of life from exploitation under any pretext. In this session, the U.N. will consider a resolution sponsored by Costa Rica calling for a comprehensive ban on human cloning. I support that resolution and urge all governments to affirm a basic ethical principle: No human life should ever be produced or destroyed for the benefit of another.

Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have changed the way we fight poverty, curb corruption, and provide aid. In 2002 we created the Monterrey Consensus, a bold approach that links new aid from developed nations to real reform in developing ones. And through the Millennium Challenge Account, my nation is increasing our aid to developing nations that expand economic freedom and invest in the education and health of their own people.

Because we believe in human dignity, America and many nations have acted to lift the crushing burden of debt that limits the growth of developing economies, and holds millions of people in poverty. Since these efforts began in 1996, poor countries with the heaviest debt burdens have received more than $30 billion of relief. And to prevent the build-up of future debt, my country and other nations have agreed that international financial institutions should increasingly provide new aid in the form of grants, rather than loans.

Because we believe in human dignity, the world must have more effective means to stabilize regions in turmoil, and to halt religious violence and ethnic cleansing. We must create permanent capabilities to respond to future crises. The United States and Italy have proposed a Global Peace Operations Initiative. G-8 countries will train 75,000 peacekeepers, initially from Africa, so they can conduct operations on that continent and elsewhere. The countries of the G-8 will help this peacekeeping force with deployment and logistical needs.

At this hour, the world is witnessing terrible suffering and horrible crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan, crimes my government has concluded are genocide. The United States played a key role in efforts to broker a cease-fire, and we’re providing humanitarian assistance to the Sudanese people. Rwanda and Nigeria have deployed forces in Sudan to help improve security so aid can be delivered. The Security Council adopted a new resolution that supports an expanded African Union force to help prevent further bloodshed, and urges the government of Sudan to stop flights by military aircraft in Darfur. We congratulate the members of the Council on this timely and necessary action. I call on the government of Sudan to honor the cease-fire it signed, and to stop the killing in Darfur.

Because we believe in human dignity, peaceful nations must stand for the advance of democracy. No other system of government has done more to protect minorities, to secure the rights of labor, to raise the status of women, or to channel human energy to the pursuits of peace. We’ve witnessed the rise of democratic governments in predominantly Hindu and Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish and Christian cultures. Democratic institutions have taken root in modern societies, and in traditional societies. When it comes to the desire for liberty and justice, there is no clash of civilizations. People everywhere are capable of freedom, and worthy of freedom.

Finding the full promise of representative government takes time, as America has found in two centuries of debate and struggle. Nor is there any — only one form of representative government — because democracies, by definition, take on the unique character of the peoples that create them. Yet this much we know with certainty: The desire for freedom resides in every human heart. And that desire cannot be contained forever by prison walls, or martial laws, or secret police. Over time, and across the Earth, freedom will find a way.

Freedom is finding a way in Iraq and Afghanistan — and we must continue to show our commitment to democracies in those nations. The liberty that many have won at a cost must be secured. As members of the United Nations, we all have a stake in the success of the world’s newest democracies.

Not long ago, outlaw regimes in Baghdad and Kabul threatened the peace and sponsored terrorists. These regimes destabilized one of the world’s most vital — and most volatile — regions. They brutalized their peoples, in defiance of all civilized norms. Today, the Iraqi and Afghan people are on the path to democracy and freedom. The governments that are rising will pose no threat to others. Instead of harboring terrorists, they’re fighting terrorist groups. And this progress is good for the long-term security of us all.

The Afghan people are showing extraordinary courage under difficult conditions. They’re fighting to defend their nation from Taliban holdouts, and helping to strike against the terrorists killers. They’re reviving their economy. They’ve adopted a constitution that protects the rights of all, while honoring their nation’s most cherished traditions. More than 10 million Afghan citizens — over 4 million of them women — are now registered to vote in next month’s presidential election. To any who still would question whether Muslim societies can be democratic societies, the Afghan people are giving their answer.

Since the last meeting of this General Assembly, the people of Iraq have regained sovereignty. Today, in this hall, the Prime Minister of Iraq and his delegation represent a country that has rejoined the community of nations. The government of Prime Minister Allawi has earned the support of every nation that believes in self-determination and desires peace. And under Security Council resolutions 1511 and 1546, the world is providing that support. The U.N., and its member nations, must respond to Prime Minister Allawi’s request, and do more to help build an Iraq that is secure, democratic, federal, and free.

A democratic Iraq has ruthless enemies, because terrorists know the stakes in that country. They know that a free Iraq in the heart of the Middle East will be a decisive blow against their ambitions for that region. So a terrorists group associated with al Qaeda is now one of the main groups killing the innocent in Iraq today — conducting a campaign of bombings against civilians, and the beheadings of bound men. Coalition forces now serving in Iraq are confronting the terrorists and foreign fighters, so peaceful nations around the world will never have to face them within our own borders.

Our coalition is standing beside a growing Iraqi security force. The NATO Alliance is providing vital training to that force. More than 35 nations have contributed money and expertise to help rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure. And as the Iraqi interim government moves toward national elections, officials from the United Nations are helping Iraqis build the infrastructure of democracy. These selfless people are doing heroic work, and are carrying on the great legacy of Sergio de Mello.

As we have seen in other countries, one of the main terrorist goals is to undermine, disrupt, and influence election outcomes. We can expect terrorist attacks to escalate as Afghanistan and Iraq approach national elections. The work ahead is demanding. But these difficulties will not shake our conviction that the future of Afghanistan and Iraq is a future of liberty. The proper response to difficulty is not to retreat, it is to prevail.

The advance of freedom always carries a cost, paid by the bravest among us. America mourns the losses to our nation, and to many others. And today, I assure every friend of Afghanistan and Iraq, and every enemy of liberty: We will stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq until their hopes of freedom and security are fulfilled.

These two nations will be a model for the broader Middle East, a region where millions have been denied basic human rights and simple justice. For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.

This commitment to democratic reform is essential to resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, tolerate corruption, and maintain ties to terrorist groups. The longsuffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true leaders capable of creating and governing a free and peaceful Palestinian state.

Even after the setbacks and frustrations of recent months, goodwill and hard effort can achieve the promise of the road map to peace. Those who would lead a new Palestinian state should adopt peaceful means to achieve the rights of their people, and create the reformed institutions of a stable democracy. Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut off public and private funding for terrorism, and establish normal relations with Israel. Israel should impose a settlement freeze, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and avoid any actions that prejudice final negotiations. And world leaders should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause.

The democratic hopes we see growing in the Middle East are growing everywhere. In the words of the Burmese democracy advocate, Aung San Suu Kyi: “We do not accept the notion that democracy is a Western value. To the contrary; democracy simply means good government rooted in responsibility, transparency, and accountability.” Here at the United Nations, you know this to be true. In recent years, this organization has helped create a new democracy in East Timor, and the U.N. has aided other nations in making the transition to self-rule.

Because I believe the advance of liberty is the path to both a safer and better world, today I propose establishing a Democracy Fund within the United Nations. This is a great calling for this great organization. The fund would help countries lay the foundations of democracy by instituting the rule of law and independent courts, a free press, political parties and trade unions. Money from the fund would also help set up voter precincts and polling places, and support the work of election monitors. To show our commitment to the new Democracy Fund, the United States will make an initial contribution. I urge other nations to contribute, as well.

Today, I’ve outlined a broad agenda to advance human dignity, and enhance the security of all of us. The defeat of terror, the protection of human rights, the spread of prosperity, the advance of democracy — these causes, these ideals, call us to great work in the world. Each of us alone can only do so much. Together, we can accomplish so much more.

History will honor the high ideals of this organization. The charter states them with clarity: “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights,” “to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.”

Let history also record that our generation of leaders followed through on these ideals, even in adversity. Let history show that in a decisive decade, members of the United Nations did not grow weary in our duties, or waver in meeting them. I’m confident that this young century will be liberty’s century. I believe we will rise to this moment, because I know the character of so many nations and leaders represented here today. And I have faith in the transforming power of freedom.

May God bless you.

Newspapers React to Rather's Apology

From Editor and Publisher, a roundup of reactions:

In an editorial prepared for its Tuesday edition, the Seattle Post-Intelligence declared: “In the flap over the 35-year-old military records of George W. Bush and John Kerry, it seems poetic justice that discredit has fallen on those who would discredit them. First it was the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Now it’s the Columbia Broadcasting System. That second violation of public trust is by far the more damaging.”

[link via Roxanne]

Read the rest here.

Kerry says he would not have overthrown Saddam

From the AP :

Staking out new ground on Iraq, Sen. John Kerry said Monday he would not have overthrown Saddam Hussein had he been in the White House, and he accused President Bush of “stubborn incompetence,” dishonesty and colossal failures of judgment. Bush said Kerry was flip-flopping.
[…]
“Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell,” he added. “But that was not, in itself, a reason to go to war. The satisfaction we take in his downfall does not hide this fact: We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure.”

Bush hit back from a campaign rally in New Hampshire, interpreting Kerry’s comment to mean the Democrat believes U.S. security would be better with Saddam still in power. “He’s saying he prefers the stability of a dictatorship to the hope and security of democracy,” the Republican incumbent said.

“Today, my opponent continued his pattern of twisting in the wind,” Bush said. “He apparently woke up this morning and has now decided, No, we should not have invaded Iraq, after just last month saying he would have voted for force even knowing everything we know today.”
[…]
Kerry called on Bush to do a much better job rallying allies, training Iraqi security forces, hastening reconstruction plans and ensuring that elections are conducted on time. But his speech was thin on details, with Kerry saying Bush’s miscalculations had made solutions harder to come by.

Bush cited Kerry’s four-point plan and dismissed it as proposing “exactly what we’re currently doing.”
[…]
Kerry said in August that he would have voted in 2002 to give Bush war-making ability, even had he known no weapons of mass destruction would be found. He stood by the vote again Monday, saying the president needed to use the threat of force to “act effectively” against Saddam.

He made a distinction between that vote to grant a president war-making authority and what he himself would have done as commander in chief with such power.
[…]
Kerry has sounded more hawkish, as in December when Democratic primary rival Howard Dean said the world was not safer with Saddam out of power. Anybody who believes that, Kerry said, doesn’t “have the judgment to be president.”

Reading that quote to his GOP crowd on Monday, Bush cracked: “I could not have said it better.”

Kerry Slams Bush over 'Colossal Failures' in Iraq

From the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) :

In a speech at New York University, Senator Kerry argued that the US-led invasion had weakened national security.

”The President’s policy in Iraq precipitated the very problem he said he was trying to prevent,” Senator Kerry said. “Iraq is becoming a sanctuary for a new generation of terrorists who some day could hit the United States.”
[…]
“The President misled, miscalculated, and mismanaged every aspect of this undertaking,” Senator Kerry said, accusing Mr Bush of making “catastrophic decisions” and surrounding himself with ideologues who provide “stubborn incompetence”.

“The President now admits to miscalculations in Iraq.

“His were not the equivalent of accounting errors. They were colossal failures of judgment - and judgment is what we look for in a president.”

“George Bush has no strategy for Iraq. I do, and I have all along,” Senator Kerry said.

Kerry Aide admits CBS-DNC Co-ordination

MSM is now reporting straight things that so far only Republican conspiracy-theorists have been claiming. Due to the controversial nature of the story, I am quoting the article in full. Note that this admission does not involve the fake documents CBS aired recently.

From USA Today :

CBS arranged for a confidential source to talk with Joe Lockhart, a top aide to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, after the source provided the network with the now-disputed documents about President Bush’s service in the Texas National Guard.

Lockhart, the former press secretary to President Clinton, said a female producer talked to him about the 60 Minutes program a few days before it aired on Sept. 8. She gave Lockhart a telephone number and asked him to call Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard officer who gave CBS the documents. Lockhart couldn’t recall the producer’s name. But CBS said Monday night that it would examine the role of producer Mary Mapes in passing the name to Lockhart.

Burkett told USA TODAY that he had agreed to turn over the documents to CBS if the network would help arrange a conversation with the Kerry campaign.

The network’s effort to place Burkett in contact with a top Democratic official raises ethical questions about CBS’ handling of material potentially damaging to the Republican president in the midst of an election. This “poses a real danger to the potential credibility of a news organization,” said Aly Colón, a news ethicist at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies.

“At Burkett’s request, we gave his (telephone) number to the campaign,” said Betsy West, senior CBS News vice president.

CBS would not discuss the propriety of the network serving as a conduit between its partisan source, Burkett, and the Kerry campaign. “It was not part of any deal” with Burkett to obtain the documents, West said, declining to elaborate.

But Burkett said Monday that his contact with Lockhart was indeed part of an “understanding” with CBS. Burkett said his interest in contacting the campaign was to offer advice in responding to Republican criticisms about Kerry’s Vietnam service. It had nothing to do with the documents, he said.

“My interest was to get the attention of the national (campaign) to defend against the attacks,” Burkett said, adding that he also talked to former Georgia senator Max Cleland and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean during the past 45 days. “Neither the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign had anything to do with the documents,” he said.

Lockhart said he phoned Burkett at the number provided by CBS. Lockhart also said that subject of the documents never came up in his conversation with Burkett. Lockhart said the conversation lasted just a few minutes. “It’s possible that the producer said they had documents,” before his conversation with Burkett, he said.

At the end of the conversation, Lockhart said he thanked Burkett for his interest and there was no further contact with him. Asked why he called Burkett, Lockhart said he talks to “a lot of people.”

“I called you, didn’t I?”

The White House said CBS’ contact with Lockhart was inappropriate. “The fact that CBS News would coordinate with the most senior levels of Sen. Kerry’s campaign to attack the President is a stunning and deeply troubling revelation,” said Dan Bartlett, White House communications director.

Transcript of Rather's Statement Tonight

From Rather Biased via Mudville Gazette:

DAN RATHER: Now, news about CBS News, and the questions surrounding documents we aired on this broadcast and on the wednesday edition of “60 minutes” on September 8. The documents purported to show that George W. Bush received preferential treatment during his years in the national guard.

At the time, CBS news and this reporter fully believed the documents were genuine. Tonight, after further investigation, we can no longer say that. The documents were provided to CBS news by a former commander in the Texas National Guard, Bill Burkett. Burkett is well known in National Guard circles for a long battle over his medical benefits, and for trying, for several years now, to discredit President Bush’s military service record.

Burkett initially told CBS news he got the documents from a fellow guardsman. But when we interviewed Burkett this past weekend, he changed his story, and told us he got the documents from a different source, one we cannot verify. Why did Burkett tell CBS news something he now says is not true? We put the question to him.

(from interview)

Why did you mislead us?

BILL BURKETT: Well, I didn’t totally mislead you. I misled you on the one individual. You know, your staff pressured me to a point to reveal that source.

RATHER: Well, we were trying to get the chain of possession.

BURKETT: I understand that.

RATHER: And you said that you had received them from someone.

BURKETT: I understand that.

RATHER: We did pressure you to say, well, you received them from someone.

BURKETT: Yes.

RATHER: And it’s true, we pressured you. It was a very important point for us.

BURKETT: Yes. And I simply threw out a name. That was basically, I guess, to take a little pressure off for a moment.

RATHER: Have you forged anything?

BURKETT: No, sir.

RATHER: He you faked anything?

BURKETT: No, sir.

RATHER: But you did mislead us.

BURKETT: Yes, I misled.

RATHER: You lied to us.

BURKETT: Yes, I did.

RATHER: Now, if you would misled us about that, which is critical, why would I or anyone believe that you wouldn’t mislead us about something else?

BURKETT: I could understand that question. I can’T… that’s going to have to be your judgment and anybody else’s.

RATHER: Burkett still insists the documents are real, but now says he was in no position to verify them.

BURKETT: I also insisted when I sat down with your staff in the first face-to-face session, before I gave up any documents, I wanted to know what you were going to do with them, and I insisted that they be authenticated.

RATHER: The failure of CBS News to do just that, to properly scrutinize the documents and their source, led to errors in our reporting. CBS News deeply regrets it. Also I want to say personally and directly, I’m sorry. CBS News President Andrew Heyward has ordered an investigation to examine the process by which the report was prepared. It will be made public. This was an error made in good faith as we try to carry on the CBS News tradition of asking tough questions and investigating reports. But it was a mistake.

Now, some reaction to our revelations today. It comes from a spokesman for President Bush, Scott McClellan.

SCOTT McCLELLAN (White House Spokesman): Obviously there are still a number of questions that need to be answered, and we look forward to seeing the results of the investigations that other media organizations have undertaken, and that CBS says that they are now undertaking. We appreciate the fact that they have said they deeply regret it, but we still want to see those questions answered.

RATHER: And Scott McClellan repeated the the White House insistence that President Bush fulfilled his obligation to the National Guard and he was honorably discharged.

***

Draw your own conclusions.

Libertarian Candidate Michael Badnarik: Interview

The folks at Slashdot put some questions to Badnarik. He has answers about free trade, the electoral college, Iraq and much more.

Read the whole thing here.

In the same vein, Bill O’Reilly is taking your questions for President Bush, who will appear on his talk show next week.

Debates Set

The debates will be spread over two weeks just before the hectic homestretch of a bitter contest, which had been tied for months until Bush recently opened a small lead in a number of national polls. The nominees will focus on foreign policy during the opening session, on Sept. 30 in Florida; they will take questions from undecided voters at the town-meeting-style debate Oct. 8 in Missouri; and they will conclude with a session on Oct. 13 in Arizona that will revolve around domestic issues.

Vice President Cheney and Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards will debate Oct. 5 in Ohio. Each of the four debates will begin at 9 p.m. Eastern time and will run 90 minutes

These times and dates are tentative.

Read more..

CBS News Concludes It Was Misled

The New York Times reports that CBS News officials now have grave doubts about the authenticity of the material:

The officials, who asked not to be identified, said CBS News would most likely make an announcement as early as today that it had been deceived about the documents’ origins. CBS News has already begun intensive reporting on where they came from, and people at the network said it was now possible that officials would open an internal inquiry into how it moved forward with the report. Officials say they are now beginning to believe the report was too flawed to have gone on the air.

UPDATE: CBS admits that it cannot prove the authenticity of its forged documents:

CBS News said Monday it cannot prove the authenticity of documents used in a 60 Minutes story about President Bush’s National Guard service and that airing the story was a “mistake” that CBS regretted.

CBS News Anchor Dan Rather, the reporter of the original story, apologized.

CBS claimed a source had misled the network on the documents’ origins.

In a statement, CBS said former Texas Guard official Bill Burkett “has acknowledged that he provided the now-disputed documents” and “admits that he deliberately misled the CBS News producer working on the report, giving her a false account of the documents’ origins to protect a promise of confidentiality to the actual source.”

The network did not say the memoranda — purportedly written by one of Mr. Bush’s National Guard commanders — were forgeries. But the network did say it could not authenticate the documents and that it should not have reported them.

CBS News President Andrew Heyward said, “We should not have used them. That was a mistake, which we deeply regret.”

In a separate statement, Rather said that “after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically:”

“I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers,” he said.

“We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry,” Rather added.

From California Yankee.

Trail Of Connections

Republican National Committee Communications Director Jim Dyke issued a statement summarizing the trail of connections between the Democrats and Rather’s forged documents:

Bill Burkett, Democrat activist and Kerry campaign supporter, passes information to the DNC; Kerry campaign surrogate Max Cleland discusses “valuable” information with Bill Burkett; Bill Burkett talks to “senior” Kerry campaign officials; an apparently unsuspecting news organization uses faked forged memos and an interview with Ben Barnes at the same time the Democratic National Committee launched Operation Fortunate Son; and Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill was among the first to call Ben Barnes and congratulate him after his interview. The trail of connections is becoming increasingly clear.

From California Yankee.

Kerry Campaigns in Australia

Diana Kerry, that is. From The Australian :

John Kerry’s campaign has warned Australians that the Howard Government’s support for the US in Iraq has made them a bigger target for international terrorists.

Diana Kerry, younger sister of the Democrat presidential candidate, told The Weekend Australian that the Bali bombing and the recent attack on the Australian embassy in Jakarta clearly showed the danger to Australians had increased.

“Australia has kept faith with the US and we are endangering the Australians now by this wanton disregard for international law and multilateral channels,” she said, referring to the invasion of Iraq.
[…]
Ms Kerry, who taught school in Indonesia for 15 years until 2000, is heading a campaign called Americans Overseas for Kerry which aims to secure the votes of Americans abroad — including the more than 100,000 living in Australia.

In the 2000 election, analysts say absentee votes cast overseas tipped the balance to Mr Bush in the decisive state of Florida.

Numerous commentators here in Australia have pointed out that the Bali bombing happened before the Iraq war.

This Close

Heard behind me: “I think he’ll be around for a while … this guy looks like JFK.” I presume he meant the first one.



And being here, Edwards absolutely has rock star appeal. The crowd is estatic for him. As Michele would say, he’s like Ronnie James Dio.



—

Sent from my Treo

On al Qaeda

“When John Kerry is President of the United States we will find al Qaeda where they are, and we will crush them.”



He also called Cheney’s recent suggestion that we will be less safe with a Kerry admin “un-American.”



Now going up in the crowd: a chant of “outsource Bush.”

Edwards Takes The Stage

Loses his jacket and rolls up his sleeves. Opens with “At his convention George Bush said he wants to be judged on his record … We want George Bush to be judged on his record.”

The Scene

Edwards is 20 minutes away they tell us. The speakers you see here are playing “Are You Gonna Go My Way?” by Lenny Kravitz. Do you figure the campaign pays royalties? Regardless, the crowd is much larger than I expected. Line from a local official: “Politics is like driving a car—when you want to go forward you put it in D, and when you want to go backwards, you put it in R.”

Opposition

4 more years …

Wait Here

First impression: “Thanks for coming … Stand in this very long line. ” Luckily the weather is as good as the turnout. Also, the campaign is identifying “veterans for Kerry among the crowd.

The Local Stump: Moblogging Edwards

Hi everyone. Apologies for my sparse participation over the past week … my high level of activity during the conventions resulted in a nearly non-stop set of work since.

But I’m back, and today will be posting something a bit different. The Kerry campaign is making stop today in my locale as John Edwards hosts a “block party” in the next town over. I was sent tickets (from the DNC connection, I assume), and I’ll be attending and moblogging from my Palm Treo 600 during the event.

I’ll start around 11:30 AM EDT.

Bush Says Memo Questions Need to be Answered

President Bush said in an interview published yesterday that there were serious questions about the authenticity of documents featured in a CBS News report suggesting that he received preferential treatment in the Texas National Guard three decades ago.

Speaking publicly for the first time about the documents, Mr. Bush told The Manchester Union-Leader, “There are a lot of questions and they need to be answered.”

He said, “I think what needs to happen is people need to take a look at the documents, how they were created, and let the truth come out.”

Read more…

Ex-Guardsman: I Contacted Kerry Campaign

A retired Texas National Guard official mentioned as a possible source for disputed documents about President Bush (news - web sites)’s service in the Guard said he passed along information to a former senator working with John Kerry’s campaign.

[…]

The retired Guard official, Bill Burkett, said in an Aug. 21 e-mail to a list of Texas Democrats that after getting through “seven layers of bureaucratic kids” in the Democrat’s campaign, he talked with former Georgia Sen. Max Cleland about information that would counter criticism of Kerry’s Vietnam War service. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the e-mail Saturday.

“I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. (Cleland) said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with,” Burkett wrote.

Read more…

Election Observers Arrive in U.S.

A team of 20 independent democracy experts from 15 countries and five continents has arrived in the United States in order to observe this year’s presidential election campaign.

The election monitors, who have been brought here by the San Francisco activist group “Global Exchange,” will be fanning out in the coming days initially to research how the election preparations are being conducted in five states. They will then return just before the actual polling November 2.

Read more…

US Navy : Kerry Medals Kosher

Updating a previous post, from the AP :

The Navy’s chief investigator concluded Friday that procedures were followed properly in the approval of Sen. John Kerry’s Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals, according to an internal Navy memo.

Vice Adm. R.A. Route, the Navy inspector general, conducted the review of Kerry’s Vietnam-ear military service awards at the request of Judicial Watch, a public interest group. The group has also asked for the release of additional records documenting the Democratic presidential candidate’s military service.

Judicial Watch had requested in August that the Navy open an investigation of the matter, but Route said in an internal memo obtained by The Associated Press that he saw no reason for a full-scale probe.

“Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed,” Route wrote in the memo sent Friday to Navy Secretary Gordon England.

“In particular, the senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in place at the time for approving these awards.”
[…]
Judicial Watch also asked the Navy inspector general to investigate Kerry’s anti-war activities after he returned from Vietnam and left active duty.

Route concluded that there was no justification for looking further into the decisions to award the medals or the anti-war activities.

“Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive,” he wrote. “The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place.

“Our review also considered the fact that Senator Kerry’s post-active duty activities were public and that military and civilian officials were aware of his actions at the time. For these reasons, I have determined that Senator Kerry’s awards were properly approved and will take no further action in this matter.”

Kerry Accuses Bush of Hiding Troops Plan

Democratic Sen. John Kerry on Friday accused the Bush administration of hiding a plan to mobilize more National Guard and Reserve troops after the election while glossing over a worsening conflict in Iraq.

“He won’t tell us what congressional leaders are now saying, that this administration is planning yet another substantial call-up of reservists and Guard units immediately after the election,” Kerry said. “Hide it from people through the election, then make the move.”

The White House called the allegation of a secret plan “completely irresponsible … false and ridiculous.” The Pentagon said troop replacements would include some from National Guard and Reserve units and those expected to be sent to Iraq had been notified.

Read more…

Fla. Supreme Court Puts Nader on Ballot

AP: Fla. Supreme Court Puts Nader on Ballot

Ralph Nader is back on Florida’s ballot — probably for good this time.

The Florida Supreme Court ruled 6-1 Friday that he can run as the Reform Party presidential candidate in the November election.

The decision met a Saturday deadline for mailing 25,000 ballots to overseas voters, most of them military personnel, and ended a dizzying two weeks during which Nader was on and off the ballot.

“This is a case that should have been thrown out of the courts sooner,” said Kevin Zeese, a spokesman for the Nader campaign.

Digital Kerry

Kuma Reality Games wants you (to play the role of the John Kerry in Vietnam)! The NYT reports that the online gaming company is set to release a game that lets players take part in a recreation of the 1969 mission for which Kerry won his Silver Star.

The game, scheduled to go online late this month, is primarily designed to be played from a digital Lieutenant Kerry’s point of view, its creators say.

“Our goal is not to give you a jungle setting where you can tear around, but to show you - at least give you a general sense of what happened,” Kuma’s chief executive, Keith Halper, said of the Kerry mission, one in a series of game missions called Freedom’s Heroes.

…

It was after he watched Senator Kerry speak before the Democratic National Convention in Boston in July, Mr. Halper said, that he decided that it was “obvious and timely” for the company to do a Kerry Vietnam game.

And, one would surmise, sure to gain notice for Kuma.

Additional recreations of missions involving politicians are in the works.

(Via Joystiq and adapted from a post at PGC)

Kerry Ad labels Cheney as Corrupt War Profiteer

From the AFP via The Australian :

John Kerry’s Democratic election campaign accused Vice-President Dick Cheney of making money from the Iraq war through his links to the Halliburton company, in a new television advert.

The spot, which will be shown in states where Kerry is in the tightest race with President George W Bush, shows Cheney saying in 2003: “I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven’t had now for over three years.”

Cheney gave up his job running the Texas-based oil services and general contracting giant to join the Bush campaign in 2000. But since saying he had no links to Halliburton, Cheney has admitted he was still receiving pension payments.

Kerry’s advert says: “The truth: As vice-president, Dick Cheney, received two million dollars from Halliburton. Halliburton got billions in no bid contracts in Iraq.

“Dick Cheney got two million dollars. What did we get? A 200 billion dollar bill for Iraq.”

54-40, or Fight?

So, is the race close or not? National polls - which, one should recall, only capture the mood of the electorate, since the battle is won or lost on a state-by-state basis - seem to be divided:

A new poll from the Pew Research Center said the “bounce” that seemed to propel Bush to a lead just after the Republican convention had disappeared. But he was ahead by double digits in another survey.

The Pew poll found the race at 46-46 among registered voters, and 47-46 Bush among likely voters. A Gallup poll being released Friday has Bush up 54-40 in a three-way matchup, with Ralph Nader (news - web sites) at 3 percent.

(Link via The Kerry Spot)

Motor Voter Fraud

Apparently voter fraud is actually a problem outside of Cook County. Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe reports on just how easy it is to cheat … and just how many people might be cheating this year.

Fake Memos Sourced?

From the Washington Post :

Documents allegedly written by a deceased officer that raised questions about President Bush’s service with the Texas Air National Guard bore markings showing they had been faxed to CBS News from a Kinko’s copy shop in Abilene, Tex., according to another former Guard officer who was shown the records by the network.
[…]
There is only one Kinko’s in Abilene, and it is 21 miles from the Baird, Tex., home of retired Texas National Guard officer Bill Burkett, who has been named by several news outlets as a possible source for the documents.
[…]
In news interviews earlier this year, Burkett said he overheard a telephone conversation in the spring of 1997 in which top Bush aides asked the head of the Texas National Guard to sanitize Bush’s files as he was running for a second term as governor of Texas. Several days later, he said, he saw dozens of pages from Bush’s military file dumped in a trash can at Camp Mabry, the Guard’s headquarters.

The Bush aides Burkett named as participants in the telephone conversation were Chief of Staff Joe M. Allbaugh and spokespeople Karen Hughes and Dan Bartlett. All three Bush aides and former Texas National Guard Maj. Gen. Daniel James have strongly denied the allegations.

Suspicions that Burkett could have been a source for the CBS documents first surfaced earlier this week when Newsweek magazine reported that Mapes flew to Texas to interview him over the summer. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that a CBS staff member, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that Burkett was a source for the “60 Minutes” report but “did not know the exact role he played.”
[…]
Earlier this year, Burkett gave interviews to numerous news outlets, including The Washington Post, alleging corruption and malfeasance at the top of the Texas National Guard, much of which have never been substantiated. He has also been a named source for several reports by USA Today, which reported Monday that it had independently obtained copies of the disputed memos soon after the broadcast.

Like CBS News, USA Today has declined to name the source of its memos on the grounds of confidentiality.

Burkett, who served with the Texas National Guard in an administrative capacity before his 1998 retirement, has been involved in a bitter dispute with the Guard over medical benefits after suffering from a tropical disease following a military assignment in Panama. He has told reporters that he had a nervous breakdown and was hospitalized for depression after he left the Guard.

Burkett has provided different accounts of exactly what Bush records he allegedly saw in the trash can at Camp Mabry. At times, he has described them as “payroll-type documents” and performance assessments. But in an Aug. 14 posting to a Web log, www.steveverdon.com, he said he saw “a two-page counseling statement” signed by Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, the officer named by “60 Minutes” as the author of its Bush memos.

It has also been reported by Ace Pilots ( an unabashedly pro-Bush blog) that :

JUST GOT OFF THE PHONE WITH ABILENE KINKOS: Bill Burkett has a standing account with the Kinkos in Abilene Texas, and while the lady who answered the phone would not be more specific she did say Burkett was in there last week she waited on him on last (a week ago) Tuesday…

Obviously this has not been independently verified (yet), and it is TCP policy to only quote major news organisations not blogs. An exception is made for first-person accounts, and this qualifies.

It is also worth noting at this stage (as does the author of Ace Pilots) that Mr Burkett was formerly in the military, and in past articles of dubious accuracy has not made any of the obvious mistakes regarding designation and style that are found in the memos (the incorrect “1st Lt” vs “1LT” for example).

The Ace of Spades HW has many useful links to Mr Burkett’s colourful behaviour in the past.

Transcript of Tonight's 60 Minutes

Via Rather Biased

Transcript of 60 Minutes, September 15, 2004.

DAN RATHER: Last week on this broadcast, we heard for the first time the full story from a texas politician who says he helped George Bush avoid military service in vietnam. Former texas house speaker Ben Barnes said he helped Bush get a highly coveted place in the National Guard. We also presented documents for the first time, which indicated that once Bush was accepted into the guard he failed to live up to the requirements of his service. We reported that the documents were written by lieutenant Bush’s National Guard squad commander, colonel Jerry Killian, who passed away in 1984.

In the past week, those documents have been subjected to extraordinary
scrutiny and criticism tonight, another voice— a credible voice— has
entered the debate. The woman who describes herself as colonel Killian’s right hand during much of the 1970s, Marion Carr Knox, colonel Killian’s secretary, flew to new york this afternoon to tell us she believes the documents we obtained are not authentic. But there’s yet another confusing twist to this story: She told us she believes what the documents actually say is exactly as we reported. Marion carr knox is 86 years old and completely comfortable in the eye of a storm. She spent more than two decades keeping pilots and officers in line at elseon air field in houston.

Now she wants to set the record straight about the memos cbs obtained.
There’s a twist. You’ve seen the memos that we broadcast, these memos that we got.

MARION CARR KNOX: I did not type those memos.

RATHER: You didn’t type these memos?

KNOX: No. And it’s not the form that i would have used. And there are words in there that belong to the army, not to the air guard. We never used those terms.

RATHER: So with these memos, you know that you didn’t type them.

KNOX: I know that i didn’t type them. However, the information in those is correct.

RATHER: Few, if any, things that I ask you about will be more important than this point: You say you definitely didn’t type these memos.

KNOX: Not these particular ones.

RATHER: Did you type ones like this?

KNOX: Yes.

RATHER: Containing the same or identical information?

KNOX: The same information, yes.

RATHER: Mrs. Knox says the information in the four memos cbs obtained is very familiar, but she doesn’t believe the memos are authentic. She does remember her boss, colonel Jerry Killian, being upset over mr. Bush’s failure to follow orders to take a physical. Did or did not lieutenant Bush take a physical as ordered by colonel Killian?

KNOX: That last time no he didn’T.

RATHER: To your norjs was he ordered to do so?

KNOX: Yes.

RATHER: This is important: I think you’ll agree, that then-lieutenant Bush was in the military, lieutenant colonel Killian was his immediate military commander, correct, his squadron command center

KNOX: Right. Yeah.

RATHER: The country was at war. It’s very unusual for a military officer, particularly a flying officer, not to obey a direct order from his superior, or if not, tell me.

KNOX: It was a big no-no. To not follow orders. I can’t remember anyone refusing now, for instance, with the physical, every officer knew that at his birthday he was supposed to have that flying physical. Once in a while they might be late, but there would be a good excuse for it and let the commander know and try to set up a date for make-up. If they did not take that physical, they were off of flying status until they did.

RATHER: Did you ever hear lieutenant colonel Killian talk about this or did he write memos about this? What was his feeling if lieutenant Bush did not take the physical as ordered?

KNOX: He was upset about it. That was one of the reasons why he… well, he wrote a memo directing him to go take the physical.

RATHER: I don’t understand it.

KNOX: I’m going to say this: It seems to me that Bush felt that he was above reproof.

RATHER: Marion carr knox remembers lieutenant Bush well, seeing him often as he showed up for training in 1971 and ‘7 2,

KNOX: He was always gentlemanly. He called me by the name of his father’s secretary. He was always apologizing about that. He couldn’t remember my name. He was very gentlemanly. I felt that his parents must have been wonderful to have produced somebody as nice as that.

RATHER: Among the contentions one of the questions raised, one, did or did not George W. Bush get into the National Guard on the basis of preferential treatment.

KNOX: I’m going to say that he did. I feel that he did because there were a lot of other boys in there the same way.

RATHER: Accurate or inaccurate to say that this unit was filled with people who had republican and democratic connections who got in on the basis of preference?

KNOX: At that time, yes.

RATHER: Now, you observed lieutenant Bush yourself.

KNOX: Uh-huh.

RATHER: Tell me about him. What kind of officer was he?

KNOX: Bush seemed to be having a good time. He didn’t seem to be having any problem with the other pilots, let me say that. But his time there, it seemed that the other fellas were, I’m going to say this, sort of resentful for his attitude.

RATHER: What was his attitude?

KNOX: Well, that he really didn’t have to go by the rules.

RATHER: He didn’t really have to go by the rules?

KNOX: It seemed that way to me.

RATHER: Knox says her boss, colonel Jerry Killian, started what she calls a cover-your-back file, a personal file where she stored the memos about the problems with mr. Bush’s performance and his failure to take a physical and the pressure Killian felt from upstairs. She addressed this memo and a reference to retired general stout pushing for a positive officer training report on lieutenant Bush. And stout is pushing to sugar coat it. Does that sound like colonel Killian? Is that the way he felt?

KNOX: That’s absolutely the way he felt about that.

RATHER: And she talked about this mental moment. She doesn’t believe the memo is authentic, but she says the facts behind it are very real. He did write a memo like this?

KNOX: Yes.

RATHER: So he did write a memo like this, not this one is your contention, but one like it?

KNOX: It’s just like a personal journal. You write things.

RATHER: Is that what he was keeping, more or laeses personal journal?

KNOX: It was more or less, that yes.

RATHER: These memos were not memos that you tipd and you don’t think they came directly out of his files?

KNOX: The information, yes. It seems that somebody did see those memos, and then tried to reproduce and maybe changed them enough so that he wouldn’t get in trouble over it.

RATHER: I understand.

KNOX: Could deny it.

RATHER: I understand.

KNOX: That’s all just supposition.

RATHER: I understand.

(voiceover) Mrs. Knox says the fact that then-lieutenant Bush was repeatedly missing drills was not lost on his fellow pilots.

Was it common knowledge or not that lieutenant Bush had not attend some drills?

KNOX: Well, they missed him. It was sort of gossip around there, and they’d snicker and so forth about what he was getting away with.

RATHER: What lieutenant Bush was getting away with?

KNOX: Yeah.

RATHER: They were snickering about that?

KNOX: Well, the other officers, and I guess there was even a resentment.

>> RATHER (voiceover): She told us again and again she believed
then-lieutenant Bush refused a direct order to take take a physical.

Colonel Killian’s son, with whom I have no argument and i respect the
Killian family tremendously for the sacrifice that they made when their husband and father was serving in the military, colonel Killian’s son says that this this isn’t true.

KNOX: He has no way of knowing whether it’s true or noT.

>> RATHER (voiceover): Mrs. Knox says for young George Bush in 1972, working in a senate campaign became more important than flying for the guard.

Back off for a moment. Take a breath. Think a little and have you tell me what you believe the story here is.

KNOX: I think it’s plain and simple. Bush didn’t think that he had to go by the rules that others did. He had this campaign to take care of, and that’s what he was going to do, and that’s what he did do.

RATHER: A few personal thoughts on the story we have reported tonight. We shall continue to aggressively investigate the story of President Bush’s service in the National Guard, and the story of the documents and memos in Colonel Killian’s file. Are those documents authentic, as experts consulted by cbs news continue to maintain?

Or were they forgeries or recreations, as marion carr knox and many other believe? We will keep an open mind, and we will continue to report credible evidence and responsible points of view as we try to answer the questions raised about the authenticity of the documents.

Having said that, we do feel that it’s important to underscore this point: Those who have criticized aspects of our story have never criticized the heart of it, the major thrust of our report: That George Bush received preferential treatment to get into the National Guard, and, once accepted, failed to satisfy the requirements of his service.

If we uncover any information to the contrary, rest assured we shall report that also.

****

We report, you decide. Feel free to discuss.

Kerry: Bush Presiding Over an 'Excuse Presidency'

After telling Don Imus that the “gloves are off,” Kerry went on the offensive today. From the Washington Post:

DETROIT — Sen. John Kerry accused President Bush on Wednesday of presiding over an “excuse presidency,” challenging Bush’s credibility on jobs, the record national deficit and the war in Iraq.
“This president has created more excuses than jobs,” Kerry told the Detroit Economic Club. “His is the excuse presidency — never wrong, never responsible, never to blame. President Bush’s desk isn’t where the buck stops — it’s where the blame begins.”
Kerry said that of the last eleven presidents, Bush was the only one to oversee a national job loss, and he said Iraq and the war on terror were no excuse. “Many of them faced more severe recessions, many of them faced bigger wars with bigger expenses,” Kerry said.
Bush’s Democratic rival focused on one of the president’s biggest potential weaknesses — a record of lost jobs and budget deficits during four years in the White House. And in a broader effort to sharpen critiques and fight back against Republican criticism, Kerry also went after Bush’s handling of Iraq.

Read the article here.

Memos on Bush Are Fake but Accurate, Typist Says

And so it continues. From the New York Times:

HOUSTON, Sept. 14 - The secretary for the squadron commander purported to be the author of now-disputed memorandums questioning President Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard said Tuesday that she never typed the documents and believed that they are fakes.

But she also said they accurately reflect the thoughts of the commander, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, and other memorandums she typed for him about Mr. Bush. “The information in them is correct,” the woman, Marian Carr Knox, now 86, said in an interview at her home here. “But I doubt,” she said, pausing, “it’s not anything that I wrote because there are terms in there that are not used by Guards, the format wasn’t the way we did it. It looks like someone may have read the originals and put that together.”

“We did discuss Bush’s conduct and it was a problem Killian was concerned about,” Mrs. Knox said. “I think he was writing the memos so there would be some record that he was aware of what was going on and what he had done.” But, she said, words like “billets,” which appear in the memorandums, were not standard Guard terms.

Mrs. Knox, who was the secretary for the squadron at Ellington Air Force Base from 1957 to 1979, said she recalled Mr. Bush’s case and the criticism of him because his record was so unusual. Mr. Killian had her type memorandums recording the problems, she said, and he kept them in a private file under lock and key. She said she had never voted for Mr. Bush because she disliked his record in office.

Mr. Killian died in 1984; his widow and son have said that they did not find any memorandums among the private effects they cleared from his office after his death. Mr. Killian’s son, Gary, who also served at the squadron and who initially thought that the signatures on the documents matched his father’s, has come to believe they are fakes, and said he doubted Mrs. Knox’s account, though he recalled her fondly.

“She’s a sweet old lady, but she’s wrong and it didn’t happen,” he said. “I always thought well of her, and I know my dad would have also, but she’s a sweet old lady.”

Gore Voters Moving To President Bush

At the Wall Street Journal, Al Hunt reports that some Gore voters may be moving to President Bush.

Matthew Dowd, chief strategist for the Bush-Cheney campaign, says internal polls show the president getting about 8% to 9% of the acknowledged 2000 Gore vote. He sees small gains from diverse constituencies: Hispanics, Jews, small-town and rural males and suburban women.

“The common attributes are strength and leadership,” Mr. Dowd explains.

From California Yankee.

Congressman Chris Cox Calls for Investigation of Memogate

Spotted via Fox News -

California Republican Congressman Chris Cox has called for an investigation by the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications into the probability that CBS News used forged documents in it’s report on Sixty Minutes II about President Bush’s Guard Service.

CBS To Make Statement About Memos Today

For those following the MemoGate saga, this news from CBS:

Fox News reports in a teaser to open their 9 a.m. programming that CBS is supposed to issue a statement today related to the allegedly forged National Guard memos. No word on the nature of the statement.

9:05 EDT: CBS will release their statement around Noon today.

9:35 EDT: Kelly Wright of Fox News reports that the CBS VP for Communications said the statement would be released via email around noon. [link source: CP‘er Jeff Quinton]

3:45 CDT: Drudge is reporting that the statement has been pushed back from 3:30 PM to 5:00 PM.

Any guesses as to what the statement will be? I’m guessing it will more of a non-statement than anything of real value.

What Difference would it make?

About the fraudulent memos again. OK, allegedly fraudulent. From the New York Times comes a comment from Bill Burkett’s Lawyer.

CBS has refused to say how it obtained the documents. But one person at CBS, who spoke on condition of anonymity, confirmed a report in Newsweek that Bill Burkett, a retired National Guard officer who has charged that senior aides to then-Governor Bush had ordered Guard officials to remove damaging information from Mr. Bush’s military personnel files, had been a source of the report. This person did not know the exact role he played.
[…]
Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush’s military service, Mr. Van Os said: “If, hypothetically, Bill Burkett or anyone else, any other individual, had prepared or had typed on a word processor as some of the journalists are presuming, without much evidence, if someone in the year 2004 had prepared on a word processor replicas of documents that they believed had existed in 1972 or 1973 - which Bill Burkett has absolutely not done” - then, he continued, “what difference would it make?”

UPDATE: Here’s the retraction:

An article on Wednesday about disputed memos obtained by CBS News that cast doubt on aspects of President Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard truncated a quotation from David Van Os, a lawyer for Bill Burkett, a retired National Guard officer whom Newsweek called a source of the memos. Asked what role Mr. Burkett had in raising questions about Mr. Bush’s military service, Mr. Van Os posed a hypothetical chain of events in which someone - not Mr. Burkett, he said - reconstructed documents that the preparer believed existed in 1972 or 1973. Mr. Van Os then asked “what difference would even that make” to the “factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?”

I apologise to our readers, and particularly to Mr. Van Os. Given the NYT’s past record, I should have known better than to trust them so completely. Not just truncating the quote, but Dowdifying it by redacting the “even”.
Mr van Os’s words would appear to have been as follows:

If, hypothetically, Bill Burkett or anyone else, any other individual, had prepared or had typed on a word processor as some of the journalists are presuming, without much evidence, if someone in the year 2004 had prepared on a word processor replicas of documents that they believed had existed in 1972 or 1973 - which Bill Burkett has absolutely not done, what difference would even that make [to the] factual reality of where was George W. Bush at the times in question and what was he doing?

Michels Wins WI GOP Senate Primary

Following up the item posted below, construction magnate and former Army Ranger Tim Michels yesterday won the Republican primary to challenge Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold. The Feingold-Michels race, in a critical swing state in the presidential race, promises to focus heavily on national security:

Michels, the only candidate in the race with military experience, also argued his background was critical in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

He ran an ad that featured the World Trade Center on fire to emphasize the dangers facing the United States and harshly criticized Feingold for his vote against the Patriot Act. The act broadened police powers to battle terrorism after the 2001 attacks.

“All of Congress came together to pass the Patriot Act except for Sen. Feingold,” Michels said.

Feingold has said he opposed the measure because it went too far in eroding civil liberties. Michels said that wasn’t an acceptable position in a time of terrorism.

“He voted no and that’s really all that counts in the end,” Michels said.

Kerry Gives Press Interview

Over the phone. No, nothing about Cambodia, Magic hats etc, but some good questions about Iraq.Time Magazine has the story.

Interesting quotes (But be sure to read the whole article for context):

TIME
Speaking of clarity, a number of your allies have said that you haven’t drawn a clear contrast between yourself and President Bush on Iraq.
KERRY
The contrast could not be clearer. They spent a lot of money trying to confuse people, but I have been consistent.

KERRY
…I believe very deeply that it takes a new President, a new credibility, a fresh start, to change the whole equation in Iraq. I will get countries involved in ways that the President doesn’t have them involved today, and I will get our troops home.
TIME
How? Diplomats say that it is not in our allies’ political interest—
KERRY
George Bush has made it not in their interest today. There are all sorts of options with respect to Shi’ites, Sunnis and Kurds in the region that this Administration is not exploring. They have failed in their diplomacy utterly. In fact, they have made it easy for countries to say no, because of their arrogance, because of the way the President chose to go to war.

TIME
What did you think of the speech of your Democratic colleague Zell Miller at the Republican Convention?
KERRY
Everybody has the right to give a speech. I didn’t see it, and I haven’t read it. I didn’t see one minute of the convention.

TIME
Will you be more specific about timetables for getting troops out?
KERRY
I have said that I have a goal to be able to bring our troops out of there within my first term, and I hope to be able to bring out some troops within the first year…

KERRY
…They [the Bush Administration] haven’t even engaged in a legitimate effort to try to really transform the ability of Israel to find a legitimate entity to negotiate with.The only thing they do is rattle the saber.
TIME
If I could get back to politics-
KERRY
I don’t talk politics.

TIME
Are you surprised at the bounce Bush got out of his convention?
KERRY
I don’t know what you’re talking about in terms of the Bush bounce….

Businessman Michels Leads In Wisconsin GOP Primary

AP is reporting an early lead in tonight’s Republican primary to choose a challenger to Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold. With 615 of 3,507 precincts reporting, millionaire construction magnate Tim Michels led with 45% of the reported tally to 29% for his nearest challenger, while conservative favorite state Senator Bob Welch (not the ex-pitcher) ran third with 23%. AP notes Michels’ background:

The only candidate in the race with military experience, Michels argued his background was critical in a time of terrorism. A millionaire, Michels, 42, donated $870,000 to his own campaign.

Feingold, for his part, has called for five debates with the GOP nominee, promising an active race in a state that will be critical to the presidential race as well.

Vote Prediction Data

Electoral-Vote.com has a new, interesting graphic. It’s an electoral map with states shrunk or inflated according the proportion of their electoral vote.

The site has the electoral vote prediction as Bush 291, Kerry 238.

There’s plenty of other interactive data on the site.

Election Projection, a site with a similar purpose, is, as of now, predicting the electoral votes at Bush 285, Kerry 253.

This Week's Toast-O-Meter

This week’s analysis of the race for the White House is up at PoliBlog.

Kerry After Action Reports Now Posted Here

The Fox Baltimore servers are getting hammered, so I’m posting copies of the reports here. To reduce load time under a heavy server load, I’ll posted each page seperately. Each is a .jpg file.

• Page One

• Page Two

• Here are both pages as a .PDF file (hat tip, Bandit’s Hideout)

Incidentally, the Kerry campaign has had his “spot reports” detailing his injuries in action online for a while … you may see them here.

Bush Redeemed

In what seems to be typical of the tone of this Presidential Race, here’s an update to a previous post, from UPI:

The Air Force has knocked down allegations by a Web site that said President Bush, when serving as an officer in the Texas Air National Guard, wore a ribbon he was not authorized to wear — a military offense that could have led to a bad-conduct discharge from the service if true.

The original story was offered to United Press International during late August by operatives from Democrats.com, an Internet activist group whose founder had earlier this year served as a source for The Boston Globe and other media outlets on stories about Bush’s service in the guard in the 1960s and 1970s.

A summary of the story was also posted on the DemocraticUnderground.com Web site by Walt Starr of Democrats.com last month, along with a photo from the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library of Lt. George W. Bush wearing the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.

An e-mail message to UPI on Aug. 27 from Bob Fertik, founder of Democrats.com, stated, “Walt Starr called the Air Force and discovered that the only AFOUA given to Bush’s unit was in 1975 — five years after the photo. Case closed!”
[…]
White House spokesman Trent Duffy referred UPI to the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Colorado where Technical Sgt. Rob Mims is the spokesman.

Mims said the claims were “not true. I verified that (Thursday). Lieutenant Bush received Air Force Outstanding Unit Award while he was in basic training with the 3724th Basic Military Training Squadron at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas.”
[…]
Mims said that personnel records in the military are often incomplete due to “clerical errors.”

“But I did verify that that unit did get the award while he (Bush) was there,” said Mims.

The sergeant added that the photo in question was “taken after pilot training.”

Mims said he confirmed his information about the medal with the Air Force’s history office. “It’s all there in black and white, we’ve spelled it out,” said Mims.

The White House, through Duffy, said: “Lieutenant Bush at the time was completely authorized to wear those ribbons he has in those pictures. He could only wear those ribbons if he has the wings. He earned his wings in 1969.”

When contacted by UPI Monday about the Air Force’s statements, Fertik refused to comment.

UPDATE : You know you have to give some people marks for sheer persistence.

Kerry After Action Reports Found

And unlike the CBS memos, these ones appear to be genuine…

From Fox Baltimore :

For more than 30 years, Kerry has portrayed a heroic version of a life and death struggle — of staring down a suspected guerilla who was about to fire upon Kerry’s swift boat. It was kill. Or be killed. At least, that’s the version Kerry tells.

Eyewitnesses offer a far different account. They allege Kerry shot a wounded teenager retreating from battle.

Kerry has made public, hundreds of pages of official Navy documents to bolster his many claims. Conspicuous by its absence is the official after action report of what actually happened that day. The after action report written by John Kerry, himself.
[…]
The pertinent section reads:

“PCF 94 beached in center of ambush in front of small path when Viet Cong sprung up from bunker 10 feet from unit. Man ran with weapon towards hootch. Forward M-60 machine gunner wounded man in leg. Officer-in-charge, LTjg Kerry, jumped ashore and gave pursuit while other units saturated area with fire and beached placing assault parties ashore. Kerry chased VC inland behind hootch and shot him while he fled — capturing one B-40 rocket launcher with round in chamber.”

So there you have it. The official record written by John Kerry supports what the critics have alleged rather than the John Wayne Kerry version the Massachusetts liberal has been telling.

The After-Action Reports are viewable online.

The Captain’s Quarters has a translation from Militarese to Human, and contains the analysis :

When you look at the action on the spot report, it reflects well on the young Lieutenant Kerry. Although it’s difficult to see how this action should have resulted in a Silver Star, it would seem a commendation of some sort would be appropriate. It’s all of the exaggeration, lies, and paperwork alterations after the fact that calls Kerry’s character into serious question.

7 Confirmed enemy *(though probably at least triple that) vs 94 troops and the crews of the Swift Boats is ‘Overwhelming odds’ alright, but not in the way Kerry’s citation claims. But it’s a good job Kerry pursued the wounded VC, as he had a loaded weapon quite capable of heavily damaging Kerry’s boat with a single shot, a primitive RPG.

Not that this alone has any bearing on his ability as a Presidential Candidate, but this is supposed to be reporting, not Op-Ed.

Hat Tip : It’z News To Me

Transcript of Dan Rather / CBS Monday Eve. News Response On Memos

From Ratherbiased, who has asked that we (and others) mirror the transcript of CBS Evening News’ Monday night response to the memo controversy:

DAN RATHER: Coming up on the “CBS evening news,” more on the controversy the president’s national guard record. It’s tonight’s “inside story.” [commercial break]

Besides checking on John Kerry’s service record, CBS has been checking president Bush’s service in the national guard, including whether or not he did or did not fulfill his commitment. We’re gathering information, asking questions and probing. CBS is also addressing questions about documents used to corroborate some of the information in our reporting. Documents used to corroborate some of the information in our reporting. Some of these questions come from people who are not active political partisans. It is tonight’s inside story. At a democratic national press conference today, some of the shots fired at military men were aimed at president Bush’s national guard service.

But official records showed he skipped a physical and was grounded. Do you know how hard it is to get your annual physical? I took 37 of them in a row.

RATHER: There has also been criticism of the new documents obtained by CBS. But CBS used several techniques to make sure these papers should be taken seriously. Talking to handwriting and document analysts and other experts who strongly insist that the documents could have be created in the 70s.

Everything in those documents that people are saying can’t be done, as you said, 32 years ago, is totally false. Not true. Like I said, proportional spacing was available, superscripts was available as a custom feature. Proportional spacing between lines was available. You could order it any way you like.

RATHER: Richard Katz, a software designer found other indications in the documents. He noticed the lower case l is used in documents instead of the actual numeral one. That would be difficult to reproduce on the computer today.

If you were doing this a week ago or a month ago on a normal laser jet printer, it wouldn’t work. The font wouldn’t be available to you.

RATHER: Katz noted the documents have the superscript “th” and a regular-sized “th”. That would be common on a typewriter, not a computer.

RICHARD KATZ: There is one document from may of 1972 which contains a normal “th” at the top. To produce that in Microsoft word, you would have to go out of your way to type the letters and then turn the th setting off or back over them and type them again.

RATHER: CBS news relied on an analysis of the contents of the documents themselves to determine the contents authenticity. It is in line with is known about the service and dates.

For instance, the official record shows that Mr. Bush was suspended from flying on august 1, 1972. That date matches the one on a memo given to CBS news, ordering that Mr. Bush he be suspended. Shortly after “60 minutes” broadcast the new documents last week, “usa today” obtained another new document. In the memo dated February 2, 1972, Colonel Killian asked to be “updated as soon as possible on flight certifications, specifically Bush.” That appears to be in line with newly released white house documents that indicate changes in Mr. Bush’s flight certification in early 1972. An analysis shows that instead of exclusively flying the f-102 he’d been certified in, the president began additional training in a lower level plane and flight simulators.

CBS news asked the White House today to answer a number of wuestions: Did a friend of the Bush family use his influence with the Texas house speaker to get George W. Bush into the National Guard? Did Lieutenant Bush refuse an order to take a required physical? Was he suspended for failing to perform up to standards? And did he, in fact, complete his commitment to the guard?

In reply, a White House spokesman told CBS’s John Roberts: “As you know, we have repeatedly addressed these issues, including during the interview you conducted on behalf of Mr. Rather last Wednesday.” The White House and the Bush-Cheney campaign always point out President Bush received an honorable discharge.

What is in the “60 Minutes” report CBS news believes to be true and believes to be authentic. Straight ahead on the “CBS Evening news,” they’re supposed to inspect your bags, not steal from them. He got caught red handed.

Florida OK's Nader's Name on Election Ballot

REUTERS: Florida OK’s Nader’s Name on Election Ballot

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader’s name can appear on Florida ballots for the election, despite a court order to the contrary, Florida’s elections chief told officials on Monday in a move that could help President Bush in the key swing state.

The Florida Democratic Party reacted with outrage, calling the move “blatant partisan maneuvering” by Gov. Jeb Bush, the president’s younger brother, and vowed to fight it.

In a memo to Florida’s 67 county supervisors of elections, Division of Elections director Dawn Roberts said the uncertainty of Hurricane Ivan, which could hit parts of the state by week’s end, forced her to act.

…

“I’m in disbelief,” said Scott Maddox, chairman of the Florida Democratic Party. “This is blatant partisan maneuvering on the part of Jeb Bush to give his brother a leg up on election day.”

“They are trying to get ballots printed with Nader’s name on them,” said Maddox. “I am astounded that Jeb Bush is willing to defy the judiciary to help his brother.”

(Ballots printed? I thought that this was supposed to be the year of e-voting.)

Bush Camp Claims To Have Lead In Colorado

If you’ve been following the state-by-state polls, you may have noticed an anomaly: Colorado, a historically (though sometimes narrowly) Republican-leaning state hasn’t budged from polls showing it as a dead heat a week or two before the GOP convention. One reason: there don’t seem to be new polls in the state since then.

Well, take this with whatever grain of salt you consider appropriate, but Bush campaign pollster Matthew Dowd told the Denver Post on Sunday that the campaign’s internal polls have Bush leading:

As Bush prepares to visit Colorado this week with a newly sizable lead in the national public opinion polls, Dowd is on the hunt for premature elation.

“We are winning in Colorado outside the margin of error right now,” Dowd acknowledges - meaning that the Bush lead is more than five or six points but not yet double digits - in post-convention polling in the state.

But Colorado “is a state we are going to keep a very, very close eye on,” he says. It’s not yet painted red. That is why Bush is visiting.

Dowd . . . cites two demographic changes that are altering the face of national elections in the West, threatening the president’s prospects here.

“The fastest-growing voter population in Colorado is the Hispanic population, which - while Republicans are doing better and better each year - is still a group that leans Democratic,” he says. “That is one reason it is taken from a Republican state that people used to count on in the Electoral College to now one of those states you are going to have to fight for and not take for granted.

“And two … is the growth of married women who work outside the home,” Dowd says. They lean more Democratic than stay-at-home moms.

Those factors have also helped put Nevada and Arizona on the list of battleground states, along with New Mexico.

“Nevada and New Mexico will be contested all the way until Election Day for sure. I don’t know if Colorado will stay on that list or not. It may be a state where in October we are doing fine,” he says.

John Kerry’s campaign has not yet resumed advertising in Colorado, Dowd notes hopefully, though it has promised to do so later in the fall.

But only in Arizona, Dowd says, is the Bush-Cheney campaign feeling secure. “There is a public poll there that has us up 16, and I will say that is consistent with what we are seeing,” he says.

John Fund Would Rather Be Blogging

The blogger element of Memogate gains additional attention, this time from John Fund of the Wall Street Journal. From today’s OpinionJournal:

A watershed media moment occurred Friday on Fox News Channel, when Jonathan Klein, a former executive vice president of CBS News who oversaw “60 Minutes,” debated Stephen Hayes, a writer for The Weekly Standard, on the documents CBS used to raise questions about George W. Bush’s Vietnam-era National Guard service.

Mr. Klein dismissed the bloggers who are raising questions about the authenticity of the memos: “You couldn’t have a starker contrast between the multiple layers of check and balances [at ‘60 Minutes’] and a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas writing.”

He will regret that snide disparagement of the bloggers, many of whom are skilled lawyers or have backgrounds in military intelligence or typeface design. A growing number of design and document experts say they are certain or almost certain the memos on which CBS relied are forgeries.

The Memos Again

USA Today has a PDF of the 4 CBS memos, plus two more. The ‘CBS 4’ appear to be earlier versions, as Bush’s address is not redacted out on the USAToday version, but is (badly) blanked out in the CBS version. They otherwise appear identical (to me).

Hat Tip : Allah is in the House

Newsweek Reports Bush’s Lead Narrowing

Newsweek reports that the double-digit “bounce” last week’s Newsweek poll found for President Bush has narrowed to six points.

Bush-Cheney had enjoyed an 11-point lead over the Kerry-Edwards ticket coming out of their convention, but in the latest poll, taken on the eve of the third anniversary of the September 11 attacks, the incumbents now lead 49 percent to 43 percent in a three-way race.

With 2 percent of the vote going to Ralph Nader, removing the independent candidate from the ticket has little effect on the spread, with 50 percent of the vote for Bush and 45 percent Kerry.

From California Yankee.

The Bounce Lives

New Time poll:

Last week’s seismic voter shift to George W. Bush showed no signs of dwindling in this week’s Time Poll. Bush continues to lead Democratic challenger John Kerry among likely voters by double digits, 52% - 41%, in the three way race, with Nader at 3%, the same as last week.

[…]

Even more damaging to Kerry is that Bush now has a 6 point lead on handling of the economy, 50% - 44%. Just one month ago, Kerry had the edge, 51% - 42%.

Read more…

[Via Instapundit]

Text of Sen. Kerry's Radio Address (9/11)

Good morning, this is John Kerry.

Three years ago today, on a bright September morning, a young couple took their 3-year-old daughter on her first airplane flight - American Flight 11, from Boston to Los Angeles. On that morning, a security guard stood watch at the World Trade Center, proud that in just six days he would become an American citizen. He had already told his wife to wear her nicest dress to the ceremony. On that morning, a firefighter left his pregnant wife, and reported for duty at Rescue Company 4 to fill in for someone else. It was supposed to be his day off.

On September 11, 2001, they and nearly 3,000 others were living out the daily rhythm of life in a nation at peace. But on that morning, in a single moment, they were lost, and our land was changed forever.

In the hours after the attacks, we drew strength from firefighters who ran up the stairs and risked their lives so that others might live. From rescuers who rushed into smoke and fire at the Pentagon. From the men and women of Flight 93 who sacrificed themselves to save our nations Capitol. They didn’t think twice. They didn’t look back. And their courage lifted our nation.

That was just the beginning. In the days that followed, we saw an outpouring of love as people across America and around the world asked themselves, “What can I do to help?” How can I, as the Scripture says, help repair the breach? Isaiah 58:12

In Whitehall Township, Pa., Christians and Jews came together to attend services at a local mosque. They came to support their Muslim friends and neighbors - and together, they prayed as one.

The people of Akron, Ohio, wanted to do something for the firefighters of New York. So they dug deep into their pockets and donated enough money to buy a fire truck, two ambulances, and three police cars.

And in Reno, Nevada, two little girls started a penny drive to help the families of the victims. They hoped, as one of them put it, to “make their hearts feel better.”

So while September 11th was the worst day this nation has ever seen, it brought out the best in all of us.

I know that for those who lost loved ones that day, the past three years have been almost unbearable. Their courage and faith have been tested in a way they never imagined. But day after day, they have held on. And day after day, they and we have found hope and comfort and strength by the quiet grace of God.

We are one America in our prayers for those who were taken from us on September 11th and for their families. And we are one America in our unbending determination to defend our country - to find and get the terrorists before they get us.

A poet once wrote that those who have left us “have a silence that speaks for them at night They say: our deaths are not ours; they are yours; they will mean what you make them They say: we leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning.”

In the past three years, with countless acts of bravery and kindness - large and small - Americans have given meaning to those lives. That terrible day has renewed our sense of purpose. And in the years ahead we will share its lessons with our children and grandchildren. We will tell them that on September 11th, ordinary men and women became heroes at a moments notice - and so can you. We will tell them that we were strong because we took care of each other - and so can you. We will tell them that we came together in tragedy, chose confidence over fear, and that our love for America far outshone the darkness of those who hate us.

Finally, we will tell them that on September 11th and the days that followed, we learned in the hardest way possible that the American spirit endures. It is that spirit which leads us to defy the terrorists and affirm that freedom will win. It is that spirit which sustains the families of September 11th as they rebuild their lives. And it is that spirit which will guide us as we rebuild those towers - stronger, higher and more beautiful than ever before. Just like America.

Thanks for listening.

———-

Text of President Bush's Radio Address (9/11)

Good morning. This is a day of remembrance for our country. And I am honored to be joined at the White House today by Americans who lost so much in the terrible events of September the 11th, 2001, and have felt that loss every day since.

Three years ago, the struggle of good against evil was compressed into a single morning. In the space of only 102 minutes, our country lost more citizens than were lost in the attack on Pearl Harbor. Time has passed, but the memories do not fade. We remember the images of fire, and the final calls of love, and the courage of rescuers who saw death and did not flee.

We remember the cruelty of enemies who murdered the innocent, and rejoiced in our suffering. We remember the many good lives that ended too soon - which no one had the right to take.

And our nation remembers the families left behind to carry a burden of sorrow. They have shown courage of their own. And with the help of God’s grace, and with support from one another, the families of terror victims have shown a strength that survives all hurt. Each of them remains in the thoughts and prayers of the American people.

The terrorist attacks on September the 11th were a turning point for our nation. We saw the goals of a determined enemy: to expand the scale of their murder, and force America to retreat from the world. And our nation accepted a mission: We will defeat this enemy.

The United States of America is determined to guard our homeland against future attacks. As the September the 11th commission concluded, our country is safer than we were three years ago, but we are not yet safe.

So every day, many thousands of dedicated men and women are on duty - as air marshals, airport screeners, cargo inspectors, border patrol officers, and first responders. At the same time, Americans serving in the FBI and CIA are performing their daily work with professionalism, while we reform those agencies to see the dangers around the next corner. Our country is grateful to all our fellow citizens who watch for the enemy, and answer the alarms, and guard America by their vigilance.

The United States is determined to stay on the offensive, and to pursue the terrorists wherever they train, or sleep, or attempt to set down roots. We have conducted this campaign from the mountains of Afghanistan, to the heart of the Middle East, to the Horn of Africa, to the islands of the Philippines, to hidden cells within our own country.

More than three-quarters of al-Qaida’s key members and associates have been detained or killed. We know that there is still a danger to America. So we will not relent until the terrorists who plot murder against our people are found and dealt with.

The United States is also determined to advance democracy in the broader Middle East, because freedom will bring the peace and security we all want. When the peoples of that region are given new hope and lives of dignity, they will let go of old hatreds and resentments, and the terrorists will find fewer recruits. And as governments of that region join in the fight against terror instead of harboring terrorists, America and the world will be more secure.

Our present work in Iraq and Afghanistan is difficult. It is also historic and essential. By our commitment and sacrifice today, we will help transform the Middle East, and increase the safety of our children and grandchildren.

Since September the 11th, the sacrifices in the war on terror have fallen most heavily on members of our military, and their families. Our nation is grateful to the brave men and women who are taking risks on our behalf at this hour.

And America will never forget the ones who have fallen - men and women last seen doing their duty, whose names we will honor forever.

The war on terror goes on. The resolve of our nation is still being tested. And in the face of danger we are showing our character. Three years after the attack on our country, Americans remain strong and resolute, patient in a just cause, and confident of the victory to come.

Thank you for listening.
——-

And More Updates and Breaking News - Memo Edition [Updated 2:14 pm EST]

First, let me explain why we are covering this so hard. Besides the fact that the underlying story (Was Bush AWOL?) is relevant to the election, what we have here is a potentially damaging story: Not necessarily damaging to the Kerry campaign, but damaging to the media, specifically CBS. And that is relevant to everything and anything as far as reporting news goes. While many bloggers and media reporting on this are doing hard research concerning the documents, my overwhelming concern is if the documents are indeed proved to be forged - and it’s looking more and more likely - this is a big blow to the credibility of the media in regards to election reporting.

Also, the documents still have not been proven beyond doubt to be false and we need to keep in mind that there is a chance that will never happen either because it can’t be proven or because they are real. In either case, I’m still amazed at the speed at which many bloggers pulled together to research this - including the finding of experts to back their claims - and it proves a point I often make when I am interviewed about blogging. When a reporter asks me what makes blogs different from the big media, I say that bloggers - left, right, indifferent - will often work together and pool resources and intelligence in order to get a story out there. The sharing of information provides reporting speed that’s unrivaled in newspapers and on television. That’s something you won’t find with big media.

And now, the updates.

The widow and son of Lt. Col. Jerry Killian are questioning the authenticity of the documents. This, we already knew. But on today’s Sean Hannity radio show, Lt. Killian’s son stated that CBS did interview him and his stepmother before the show aired. They voiced their concerns to the reporter and stated many reasons why they believe the documents to be false. Not only did CBS decide to not include these statements in the 60 Minutes report, but they also did not follow up on two names that Mr. Killian gave to the reporter of pilots who would back their statements. The reporter stated that one of the pilots was “too pro-Bush.” Mr. Killian will appear on Hannity and Colmes this evening.

When Dan Rather addresses this issue on television tonight, it’s expected that he will address mainly the “th” controversy in regards to typesetting. However, QandO has 20 other angles of veracity that should be questioned.

Bill at INDC Journal has more on the typography expert he consulted.

Via Powerline:

Longtime Democratic strategist Pat Caddell said Friday that if documents aired by CBS newsman Dan Rather Wednesday night turn out to be forged, as alleged by experts, the presidential race “is over.”
“It would be the end of the race,” Caddell told Fox News Live. “It would be the end of the race,” he repeated.

Personally, I don’t believe this only because there is no proof that the the documents came from within the Kerry campaign. No one can pin this on Kerry or the DNC until the source of the documents is named.

CBS issued this statement from Dan Rather today:

“Today on the Internet and elsewhere, some people, including many who are partisan political operatives, concentrated, not on the key questions of the overall story, but on the documents that were part of the support of the overall story.”

The problem is, the key questions of the overall story are moot if the evidence is false.

Scroll down that link for a partial transcript of a Rather interview in which he says: “So one, there is no internal investigation. Two, somebody may be shell-shocked, but it is not I and it is not anybody at CBS News. And you can tell who’s shell-shocked by the ferocity of these people who are spreading these rumors.”

I hesitate to call them “rumors” when they are well-researched and backed by not only experts, but material witnesses.

Daily Recyler has the full Rather interview that aired today.

Belmont Club has more thoughts on how this affects the media.

Paul at Wizbang reports on something that probably has no bearing on the outcome of this story but which I found amusing for some reason: The forensic expert that CBS used for the documents is apparently the same person how pronounced that Kurt Cobain was murdered, rather than a suicide casualty.

UPDATE:

Kerry Spot has the transcript of tonight’s Rather Report.

UPDATE:

For those who read the Boston Globe story today that seems to contradict forensic document examiner Philip D. Bouffard told to Bill at INDC Journal, read Bill’s update, with more quotes from Mr. Bouffard which seem to imply that the Globe mischaracterized Bouffard’s words.

And if your eyes are glazing over with all the talk of kerns and spacing, try this:

I was cleaning out my Grandpa’s attic, and I found Teddy Roosevelt’s cellphone with all his numbers still in it! Just start at the top and scroll.

This story was originally posted at 2004-09-10 18:42:16

Kerry: Al Qaeda Benefits From Bush Gun Stance

Sen. John Kerry charged Friday that President Bush was helping terrorists and caving in to the National Rifle Association by not pushing to extend the 10-year-old federal assault weapons ban that expires at 12:01 a.m. Monday.

The Democratic presidential nominee said an al Qaeda training manual recovered in Afghanistan advised terrorists that it is easy to obtain guns in the United States, and he said the 10-year-old ban on 19 types of semiautomatic guns and on ammunition clips of more than 10 rounds helped curb would-be terrorist attacks.

“In the al Qaeda manual, they were telling people to go out and buy assault weapons, to come to America and buy assault weapons,” Kerry told an audience in St. Louis.

“Every law enforcement officer in America doesn’t want us selling assault weapons in the streets of America, but George Bush, he says, ‘Well, I’m for that,’ ” said Kerry, a longtime supporter of the ban.

Read more…

Killian son on H&C

originally posted here

Gary Killian is being interviewed by Alan Colmes right now. He thinks all the documents are forged - nothing new.

Meanwhile, Hannity had Amy Barnes on his radio show today, and apparently, there’s a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on. A publicist for her father apparently called Hannity’s screener and cancelled the interview - purportedly on her behalf. Very fishy stuff.

Killian says he gave names to a CBS producer BEFORE the 60 Minutes report. So what Dan Rather says about corroborating evidence is BS. Rather and his cohorts at CBS refused to air testimony from sources that disagreed with their angle on the story. This is NOT journalism.

Killian says he spoke to Mary Mates (sp?) out of a Dallas office of CBS before the story aired.

No one from CBS has contacted anyone from the Killian family since the story aired. Killian didn’t see Dan Rather’s defense on the CBS Evening News tonight.

Killian says he’d rather just “give it the benefit of the doubt and say they didn’t do their homework.”

Hannity says it seems they were setting up the president.

Colmes will be interviewing Amy Barnes after the break.

Bush Memo Update [Updated - 2:28 pm EST]

[The post below was getting a little bit long, updates will go here]

The Weekly Standard reports:

Xavier University’s [Richerd] Polt (who operates a website dedicated to typewriters), in an email, offers two possible scenarios. “Either these are later transcriptions of earlier documents (which may have been handwritten or typed on a typewriter), or they are crude and amazingly foolish forgeries. I’m a Kerry supporter myself, but I won’t let that cloud my objective judgment: I’m 99% sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s.”

Says Flynn: “This looks pretty much like a hoax at this point in time.”

Meanwhile CBS is still sticking by the memos, according to Word Net Daily:

Spokeswoman Kelli Edwards said she was aware of the charge that the documents, purportedly produced in 1972 and 1973, appear to have been forged with a modern word processor.

“As is standard practice at CBS News, each of the documents broadcast on ‘60 Minutes’ was thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity,” she said.

Edwards later sent an email to WND:

“CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written. These individuals were close associates of [Bush commander] Colonel Jerry Killian and confirm that the documents reflect his opinions at the time the documents were written.”

Ah…while the documents may or may not be real, what matters is the opinons were real.

As a side note to those who were questioning the “expert witnesses” cited in the post below, Bill at INDC Journal has an update on the near impeccable credentials of the expert he contacted.

Hugh Hewitt has much more, while AP has an article stating that the son of the memo’s alleged author does not think the memos are real.

The Daily Recycler has the video of Brit Hume’s report on the memos, in case you missed it.

[Thanks to special correpsondent Allah Pundit for helping me put this story and its myriad of links together today]

UPDATE

So far just a Drudge exclusive:

CBS NEWS executives have launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush’s National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

“The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected,” a top CBS source explained late Thursday.

The source, who asked not to be named, described CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather as being privately “shell-shocked” by the increasingly likelihood that the documents in question were fraudulent.

Rather, who anchored the segment presenting new information on the president’s military service, will personally correct the record on-air, if need be, the source explained from New York.

Also, ABC has an article in which the wife of Lt. Col Jerry Killian (the signer of the document) queistions the veracity of the documents:

“The wording in these documents is very suspect to me,” she told ABC News Radio in an exclusive phone interview from her Texas home. She added that she “just can’t believe these are his words.”

Killian’s son adds:

“It was not the nature of my father to keep private files like this, nor would it have been in his own interest to do so,” he said.

WaPo also offers an article about the documents today, stating:

After doubts about the documents began circulating on the Internet yesterday morning, The Post contacted several independent experts who said they appeared to have been generated by a word processor.

Well, “the internet” was way ahead of them on that one.

According to Drudge, Nightline will tackle this subject tonight and the show will include these words from the widow of Killian.

Spacetown gets into the how and why of it all.

RatherBiased also has continuing coverage.

UPDATE:

John Podhoretz at the New York Post has a story on the memos today and , so far, he is the only writer from the mainstream media to credit bloggers:

THE populist revolu tion against the so- called mainstream media continues. Yesterday, the citizen journalists who produce blogs on the Internet — and their engaged readers — engaged in the wholesale exposure of what appears to be a presidential-year dirty trick against George W. Bush.

What the bloggers and their audiences did was call into profound question the authenticity of four documents proudly trumpeted by CBS News in a much-heralded investigative report on Wednesday night’s edition of “60 Minutes” about the president’s National Guard service in the early 1970s.

UPDATE:

More typography evidence from Allah Pundit.

Rather Speaks Up/CBS Issues Statement [Updated, with video]

From Drudge, transcripted from a CNN interview today:

CBSNEWS anchor and 60 MINUTES correspondent Dan Rather publicly defended his reporting Friday morning after questions were raised about the authenticity of newly unearthed memos aired on CBS which asserted that George W. Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer in the Texas Air National Guard.

CNN TRANSCRIPT:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN RATHER, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: I know that this story is true. I believe that the witnesses and the documents are authentic. We wouldn’t have gone to air if they would not have been. There isn’t going to be — there’s no — what you’re saying apology?

QUESTION: Apology or any kind of retraction or…

RATHER: Not even discussed, nor should it be. I want to make clear to you, I want to make clear to you if I have not made clear to you, that this story is true, and that more important questions than how we got the story, which is where those who don’t like the story like to put the emphasis, the more important question is what are the answers to the questions raised in the story, which I just gave you earlier.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CBS NEWS executives on Thursday launched an internal investigation into whether its premiere news program 60 MINUTES aired fabricated documents relating to Bush’s National Guard service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. “The reputation and integrity of the entire news division is at stake, if we are in error, it will be corrected,” a top CBS source explained late Thursday

UPDATE:

[Via reader JGreen] CBS has issued this statement:

This report was not based solely on recovered documents, but rather on a preponderance of evidence, including documents that were provided by unimpeachable sources, interviews with former Texas National Guard officials and individuals who worked closely back in the early 1970s with Colonel Jerry Killian and were well acquainted with his procedures, his character and his thinking.

In addition, the documents are backed up not only by independent handwriting and forensic document experts but by sources familiar with their content. Contrary to some rumors, no internal investigation is underway at CBS News nor is one planned.

Daily Recycler once again comes through with the media: Video of Rather on CNN.

UPDATE”

[Via Allah Pundit] Rather is going to talk about the controversy on air tonight:

NEW YORK, Sept. 10 /PRNewswire/ — Later today, CBS News will address on the air and in detail the issues surrounding the documents broadcast in the 60 MINUTES report on President Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard. At this time, however, CBS News states with absolute certainty that the ability to produce the “th” superscript mentioned in reports about the documents did
exist on typewriters as early as 1968, and in fact is in President Bush’s official military records released by the White House. This and other issues surrounding the authenticity of the documents and more on this developing story will be reported on tonight on THE CBS EVENING NEWS WITH DAN RATHER.

More Questions About the Bush Memo (American Spectator Article)

Very interesting story at American Spectator (site is down now due to Drudge link, so I am printing the entire text here. Text source: Daily Recycler)

More than six weeks ago, an opposition research staffer for the Democratic National Committee received documents purportedly written by President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard squadron commander, the late Col. Jerry Killian.

The oppo researcher claimed the source was “a retired military officer.” According to a DNC staffer, the documents were seen by both senior staff members at the DNC, as well as the Kerry campaign.

“More than a couple people heard about the papers,” says the DNC staffer. “I’ve heard that they ended up with the Kerry campaign, for them to decide to how to proceed, and presumably they were handed over to 60 Minutes, which used them the other night. But I know this much. When there was discussion here, there were doubts raised about their authenticity.”

The concerns arose from the sourcing. “It wasn’t clear that our source for the documents would have had access to them. Our person couldn’t confirm from what file, from what original source they came from.”

The documents that CBS News used were not documents from any of Bush’s personnel files from his time in the National Guard. Rather, CBS News stated that they were documents uncovered in the personnel files of Killian. That would explain why the White House or the Pentagon had never before released or even seen them.

According to a Kerry campaign source, there was little gossip about the supposedly hot documents inside the office of the campaign on McPherson Square. “Those documents were not something anyone was talking about or trying to generate buzz on,” says the staffer. “It wasn’t like there were small groups of people talking about this as a bombshell. I think people here weren’t sure what to make of it, because provenance of these documents was uncertain.”

A CBS producer, who initially tipped off The Prowler about the 60 Minutes story, says that despite seeking professional assurances that the documents were legitimate, there was uncertainty even among the group of producers and researchers working on the story.

“The problem was we had one set of documents from Bush’s file that had Killian calling Bush ‘an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot.’ And someone who Killian said ‘performed in an outstanding manner.’ Then you have these new documents and the tone and content are so different.”

The CBS producer said that some alarms bells went off last week when the signatures and initials of Killian on the documents in hand did not match up with other documents available on the public record, but producers chose to move ahead with the story. “This was too hot not to push. If there were doubts, those people didn’t show it,” says the producer, who works on a rival CBS News program.

Now, the producer says, there is growing concern inside the building on 57th Street that they may have been suckered by the Kerry campaign. “There is a school of thought here that the Kerry people dumped this in our laps, figuring we’d do the heavy lifting on the story. That maybe they had doubts about these documents but hoped we’d get more information,” says the producer. “If that’s the case, then we’re bigger fools than we already appear to be judging by all the chatter about how these documents could be forgeries.”

ABC News’ political unit held a conference call at 7:00 p.m. Thursday evening to discuss the memo and its potential ramifications should the documents turn out to be a forgery. That meeting took place around the time that the deceased Killian’s son made public statements questioning the documents’ authenticity.

According to one ABC News employee, some reporters believe that the Kerry campaign as well as the DNC were parties in duping CBS, but a smaller segment believe that both the DNC and the Kerry campaign were duped by Karl Rove, who would have engineered the flap to embarrass the opposition.

Again, there is a lot of hearsay and so far unproven accusations involved in this. We report, you decide. I’m definitely interested in your comments on the Spectator story.

Damaging Bush Memos Could Be Forgeries [Updated 7:24 EST]

The following is a post reprint from Powerline Blog, which is breaking this story and is updating frequently. It oringally appeared here and is reprinted with permission of the authors.

Today’s big Boston Globe story on President Bush’s Air National Guard service is based on memos to file from the personal records of the late Lieutenant Colonel Jerry B. Killian: “Bid cited to boost Bush in Guard.”

The Globe story is itself based on last night’s 60 Minutes report: “New questions on Bush Guard duty.” The online version of the 60 Minutes story has links to the memos. Killian died in 1984; CBS states that it “consulted a handwriting analyst and document expert who believes the material is authentic.” Readers Tom Mortensen and Liz Mac Dougald direct us to a FreeRepublic thread post no. 47 to this effect:

Every single one of the memos to file regarding Bush’s failure to attend a physical and meet other requirements is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman. In 1972 people used typewriters for this sort of thing (especially in the military), and typewriters used mono-spaced fonts.

The use of proportionally spaced fonts did not come into common use for office memos until the introduction high-end word processing systems from Xerox and Wang, and later of laser printers, word processing software, and personal computers. They were not widespread until the mid to late 90’s.

Before then, you needed typesetting equipment, and that wasn’t used for personal memos to file. Even the Wang and other systems that were dominant in the mid 80’s used mono-spaced fonts. I doubt the TANG had typesetting or high-end 1st generation word processing systems.

I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.

The “Memo To File” of August 18, 1973 also used specialized typesetting characters not used on typewriters. These include the superscript “th” in 187th, and consistent ’ (right single quote) used instead of a typewriter’s generic ’ (apostrophe). These are the sorts of things that typesetters did manually until the advent of

smart correction in things like Microsoft Word.

I was a clerk/typist for the US Navy at the Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC) in Newport RI for my summer job in 1971 when I was in college. I note the following with regard to the Killian memos:

1) Tom Mortensen is absolutely correct. Variable type was used only for special printing jobs, like official pamphlets. These documents are forgeries, and not even good ones. Someone could have at least found an old pre-Selectric IBM (introduced around 1962). Actually, I believe we were using IBM Model C’s at the time, which was the precursor to the Selectric.

2) I also used a Variype machine in 1971. I fooled around with it in my spare time. It was incredibly difficult to set up and use. It was also extremely hard to correct mistakes on the machine. Most small letters used two spaces. Capital letters generally used three spaces. I think letters like “i” may have used one space. Anyway, you can see that this type of machine was piloted by an expert, and it would NEVER be used for a routine memo. A Lt. Colonel would not be able to identify a Varitype machine, let alone use it.

3) US Navy paper at the time was not 8 1/2 x 11. It was 8 x 10 1/2. I believe this was the same throughout the military, but someone will have to check on that. This should show up in the Xeroxing, which should have lines running along the sides of the Xerox copy.

4) I am amused by the way “147 th Ftr.Intrcp Gp.” appears in the August 1, 1972 document. It may have been written that way in non-forged documents, but as somone who worked for ComCruDesLant, I know the military liked to bunch things together. I find “147 th” suspicious looking. 147th looks better to me, but the problem with Microsoft Word is that it keeps turning the “th” tiny if it is connected to a number like 147. And finally……

5) MORE DEFINITIVE PROOF OF FORGERY: I had neglected even to look at the August 18, 1973 memo to file. This forger was a fool. This fake document actually does have the tiny “th” in “187th” and there is simply no way this could have occurred in 1973. There are no keys on any typewriter in common use in 1973 which could produce a tiny “th.” The forger got careless after creating the August 1, 1972 document and slipped up big-time.

In summary, the variable type reveals the Killian memos to be crude forgeries, the tiny “th” confirms it in the 8/18/73 memo, and I offer my other points as icing on the cake.

UPDATE 3: We have received so much information from readers that it’s hard to keep up. Reader Fred Godel points us to Kevin Drum’s Washington Monthly “Smoking gun update” stating that the White House has released copies of two of the memos and left their authenticity undisputed. Reader John Burgess adds:

I’m afraid the Post 47 at Free Republic is not compelling. By 1969, I was using an IBM Selectric typewriter, with proportional type balls. They were widely available in the public sector-and thus readily available to the military. I do not recall having used a Palatine typeface, but Times Roman was certainly common. While I do think the entire argument about “Bush/AWOL” is bull, the raising of type faces is not useful. In fact, it’s counterproductive because it’s demonstrably false.

Reader Chris Rohlfs points to another “document in Bush’s record (http://www.cis.net/~coldfeet/doc27.gif) which, if real (I got that link from here) appears to have some typing from the same typewriter. Look at the word ‘Recommend.’” Reader Larry Nichols adds:

What a freakin’ joke! I served in the Air Force for 21 years — 1968 to 1989 — the first 7 as a Personnel Specialist and the remainder as a PSM (Personnel Systems Manager). I also spent 2 years as an inspector at Hq SAC, Offutt AFB, NE in Omaha, inspecting Personnel Offices at all 26 SAC bases. As a PSM I had to know every job in Personnel, including the proper filing of documents in individual military records. Memos were NOT used for orders, as the one ordering 1LT Bush to take a physical. This would have done as a letter, of which a copy should have been sent to the CBPO (Consolidated Base Personnel Office) to be filed in 1LT Bush’s military record. Memos DID NOT get filed in personnel records.

I first used a computer in the Air Force in 1971 while stationed at Albrook AFB, Canal Zone. The computers were used only for updating records data. The Air Force was the first branch of the military to use a mainframe (Burroughs B-3500) computer for updating military records. Punch cards were used up until then. There were no Word Processors used until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. Typewriters were still used extensively until the mid-1980s. These memos appear to be bogus.

As far as an Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) on Bush, unless he was under a supervisor for X number of days during a reporting period, no report could be written. Under special circumstances, a report could be written with only 60 days of supervision. The period may cover an extended period. Example: FROM 1 JUN 1970 THRU 15 DEC 1971 (more than 1 year) DAYS SUPERVISED: 60. The “vanilla civilian” Liberals and Journalists should quit trying to talk and write about things they know nothing about. In Sen. Kerry’s case, that includes almost everything!

Finally — finally for the moment — reader Joshua Persons writes:

I’ve written a post regarding the forgery post on my weblog (click here). Mostly a rehash, but I googled and found a comparable, unrelated government memo from 1972 for visual comparison. Check it out at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/72e30.pdf .

[End Powerline portion of post]
——

Ed note: This falls into the We Report, You Decide category of TCP.

——

Charles Johnson has more.
We’ll be updating as Power Line does, but you can check over there for updates as well.

UPDATE:

Bill at INDC Journal contacted a Forensic Document Examiner to go over the documents in question.

It’s very possible that someone decided to create this document on a computer… I’ve run across this situation before … my gut is this could just well be a fabrication.”

Read the rest.

Here’s a side by side comparison of signatures from the known to be true document (left) and the questionable document (right).

[click for larger image. link source: Allah Pundit]

UPDATE: The Powerline blog has been linked by Drudge and it hit their servers pretty hard, so you may not be able to get to their site right now. Most everything they have blogged already has been reprinted here. I’ll try to get you updates.

This article has more professional opinions on forgery.

But the use of the superscript “th” in one document - “111th F.I.S” - gave each expert pause. They said that is an automatic feature found in current versions of Microsoft Word, and it’s not something that was even possible more than 30 years ago.

“That would not be possible on a typewriter or even a word processor at that time,” said John Collins, vice president and chief technology officer at Bitstream Inc., the parent of MyFonts.com.

More here, including relevant video from 60 Minutes.

Powerline is back up and has more updates.

UPDATE: On the rebuttal side, Greg at The Talent Show says the documents don’t line up at all and Atrios has a bit of typewriter history.

UPDATE: Kevin Drum reports that CBS will stand by its use of the memos.

For what it’s worth, I spoke to someone a few minutes ago who’s familiar with how the documents were vetted, and the bottom line is that CBS is very, very confident that the memos are genuine. They believe that (a) their sources are rock solid, (b) the provenance of the documents is well established, and © the appearance of the documents matches the appearance of other documents created at the same place and time. In addition, people who knew Killian well have confirmed that the memos are genuine.

UDPATE:

Son of Late Officer Questions Bush Memos
[Ed note: I am not making claims as to the veracity of all these claims. I simply think this is a relevant story. I’m looking to post rebuttals and refutations, if you have links to any]

The authenticity of newly unearthed memos stating that George W. Bush failed to meet standards of the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War was questioned Thursday by the son of the late officer who reportedly wrote the memos.

“I am upset because I think it is a mixture of truth and fiction here,” said Gary Killian, son of Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, who died in 1984.

Bush 52-43 in WaPo/ABC News Poll

The new post-convention Washington Post/ABC News poll is out, and the breakdowns are not good news for John Kerry:

Bush 52-43 in three way race, likely voters
Bush 50-44 in three way race, registered voters
Bush 50-46 in poll of 19 battleground states
90% of Bush supporters “strongly” support Bush
75% of Kerry supporters “strongly” support Kerry
Bush supporters pro-Bush 84-14
Kerry supporters anti-Bush (as opposed to pro-Kerry) 55-41
Bush job approval rate 52%
Bush favorable/unfavorables 51-39
Kerry favorable/unfavorables 36-42
#1 issue economy/jobs 27, terrorism or Iraq 43 and rising
Bush beats Kerry on economy 47-43
Bush beats Kerry on Iraq 53-37
Bush beats Kerry on terrorism 57-35
Bush beats Kerry on judicial appointments 46-36 (!)
Bush beats Kerry on “will make the country safer and more secure” 54-35
Bush beats Kerry on “He’s taken a clear stand on the issues” 56-29
Bush beats Kerry on who’d be better commander-in-chief 53-40
Bush beats Kerry on who is expected to win 63-26
Iraq war was worth fighting 51-45
Iraq war is part of war on terror 58-39
We are winning the war on terror 55-25

Read the full WaPo analysis here.

Faked Documents - Whose blood do the others smell - Bush or Rather? (UPDATED 9:13 ET)

cross-posted at SSG

Alright out of the ordinary for my blog, but as all of the political blogs are hopping on the possibility that Dan Rather may have reported on what may be faked documents, I went ahead and took a peak at the daily Nightline email with the subject line, “Truth and Politics.”

If you haven’t caught up on this brewing story take a look at Powerline, Command Post, LGF, Allahpundit, Spacetown, and Wizbang.

Now take a look at what Nightline’s daily email had to say~~

Tonight we’re going to look at two issues, separate but related. The first centers on new questions about whether or not President Bush really did complete his service in the National Guard. Our friends over at CBS News were the first to report on new documents that raise new questions about President’s service. One of his former superiors, who is now deceased, wrote a memo to his file saying that then-Lt.Bush apparently disobeyed a direct order in not undergoing a required physical. The White House fired back of course. Chris Bury will report on the new documents, coming out at the same time as a new ad campaign by a group calling itself Texans for Truth. Sound familiar? Of course. Does this issue resonate with the voters?

Also tonight, Dave Marash will report on a statement made by Vice-President Cheney earlier this week. In essence, the Vice-President said that the election of John Kerry could make it more likely that terrorists would attack the U.S.

(Full text of Nightline email can be found in the extended entry)

Regardless of how you lean during this election, this can be rather troubling for big media. Clearly, if the faked documents story bears out, it can (and probably should) be devastating to Dan Rather’s credibility. The second issue they claim to examine is a clear case of taken Cheny’s quote out of context. Here’s what he really said: (emphasis mine)

“If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we’ll get hit again — that we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,” Cheney said.

“And then we’ll fall back into the pre-9/11 mindset, if you will, that in fact these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts and that we’re not really at war. I think that would be a terrible mistake for us.”

He’s clearly talking about the way in which we respond to terrorist attacks, not that a Kerry presidency would bring additional attacks.

UPDATE: NBC’s First Read has this~~

• Thursday, September 9, 2004 | 9:30 p.m. ET
From Elizabeth Wilner, Mark Murray, Huma Zaidi and Aaron Inver

First glance (54 days until Election Day)
As the whole Swift Boaters episode proved, to the extent either side has to spend a news cycle or three explaining their man’s military records from the past, they lose the cycle. New documents released by the White House just shy of 10:00 pm last night, after first being reported on CBS, add more fuel to the Ben Barnes/Boston Globe-revived debate over whether Bush fulfilled his National Guard obligations, which is likely to overshadow Bush’s focus on the economy today and Kerry’s focus on health care.

UPDATE2: For what it’s worth, I sent the following to Nightline’s staff via their webpage~~

I received your daily email about tonight’s broadcast and am certainly intrigued. I am especially intrigued considering today’s developments regarding the possibility that the documents cited by Dan Rather may well be fakes. While there has been a great deal of documentation into what more and more appears to be the likelihood that the documents are indeed forged, the question becomes how will you deal with the story. I’ve added my thoughts at the web log The Command Post. You can read the whole thing at http://www.command-post.org/2004/2_archives/015176.html.

The people will be watching, do us proud.

UPDATE3: Fred Barnes on Fox News’s Special Report with Brit Hume is attacking along all of the lines mentioned in Powerline’s and others posts and notes that Gary Killian, son of Lt. Col. Killian is disputing the documents.

UPDATE 4: Hannity and Colmes will be discussing the authenticity of the documents shortly, per their promos.

Nightline Daily E-Mail
September 9, 2004

TONIGHT’S FOCUS: New allegations about President Bush’s service in the National Guard. Vice-President Cheney makes a statement that many in his own party consider over-the-top. Looking for the truth, but in politics these days, does the truth really matter?

————————————————————————————————————————

Negative attacks work. No matter how much voters say they only want to hear about the issues and all, the reason that campaigns put so much effort into defining their opponents in negative terms is that it works. You have only to look at the impact of the attacks on John Kerry’s record in Vietnam. A rebuttal, even when it has the advantage of being accurate, never seems to have the same power as the original attack. And if you repeat something often enough, it takes on a life of its own.

Tonight we’re going to look at two issues, separate but related. The first centers on new questions about whether or not President Bush really did complete his service in the National Guard. Our friends over at CBS News were the first to report on new documents that raise new questions about President’s service. One of his former superiors, who is now deceased, wrote a memo to his file saying that then-Lt.Bush apparently disobeyed a direct order in not undergoing a required physical. The White House fired back of course. Chris Bury will report on the new documents, coming out at the same time as a new ad campaign by a group calling itself Texans for Truth. Sound familiar? Of course. Does this issue resonate with the voters?

Also tonight, Dave Marash will report on a statement made by Vice-President Cheney earlier this week. In essence, the Vice-President said that the election of John Kerry could make it more likely that terrorists would attack the U.S. This is, as many Republicans were quick to point out along with Democrats, over the top. The campaign, as campaigns are designed to do, immediately began explaining what he really meant. But does that matter, does anyone really pay attention to what comes after a charge like that? The Democrats are, of course, guilty of similar attacks. And these will certainly not be the last ones we see in the next two months or so.

Ted will anchor tonight, we’ll look at the truth, or lack thereof behind these two stories. There is a football game tonight, so we’ll be delayed on the East Coast. I hope you’ll join us.

Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff
Nightline Offices
ABC News Washington Bureau

Nader off the ballot in Florida

A Leon County circuit judge issued an emergency order Wednesday night removing Ralph Nader from the Florida Presidential ballot.

Less than 11 hours before Secretary of State Glenda Hood is supposed to certify the ballots for 67 counties - which signals elections supervisors to mail thousands of ballots to Floridians overseas, including troops in Iraq - Davey ruled that the Reform Party is no longer a real political party. Therefore, he held that Nader’s certification as the Reform candidate did not meet Florida laws, which require a presidential candidate to get nearly 100,000 voter signatures or be nominated by a national convention.

The ruling could be reversed on appeal.

New CBS Poll: Bush by 7

CBSNews reports that a week after Republican National Convention a new CBS News poll finds President Bush has a seven-point lead over Kerry.

From California Yankee.

President Bush Endorsed by Former Leaders Of Two Veterans' Groups

United Press International reports that President Bush has been endorsed by the former leaders of the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars.

From California Yankee.

President Bush Gains in Ohio And Missouri

USA Today reports that President Bush now holds a clear lead over Kerry in the critical battlegrounds states of Missouri and Ohio.

Bush’s margins in Missouri and Ohio are the first statistically significant leads that either candidate has held in a dozen surveys USA TODAY has taken in battleground states during this election.

His 14-point edge in Missouri raises questions about whether the traditional bellwether is still competitive. The Kerry campaign hasn’t purchased air time for TV ads in the state this month.

“What’s happening is more and more states that are Bush states (from 2000) are getting taken off the table,” says Matthew Dowd, chief strategist for the Bush campaign. “Now the battleground states are In becoming much more predominantly Gore states, which is good news for us,” he said.

From California Yankee.

Text of Kerry Speech on Iraq War

Senator Kerry spoke this morning in Cincinnati, Ohio, seeking to commemorate the 1,000th American death in Iraq by laying out his position on the war there. I’ve excerpted the text of his foreign policy remarks, which his website captions Remarks on Bush’s Wrong Choices in Iraq That Have Left Us Without the Resources We Need at Home:

Yesterday in Iraq, we marked the most incalculable loss of all. Yesterday, we reached a tragic milestone. More than 1,000 of America’s sons and daughters gave their lives in service to our country. More than 1,000 sons and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters who will never come home to live the lives they dreamed of. We honor them, we pray for them and for their families, and we owe it to their memory and all our troops to do what’s right in Iraq.

I also want to speak directly to the more than 150,000 troops currently risking their lives as far away as Iraq and Afghanistan. Your country is proud of you. You are the most dedicated, capable military we’ve ever had. We are united as a nation in our support for you. We pledge to stand with your families as you stand on the front lines for ours. You are the best of America. And you perform magnificently every day. We thank you for your service and your sacrifice.

Twenty-three months ago, President Bush came here to ask the American people for our support. And he promised then to make the right choices when it came to sending young Americans to Iraq.

Here in Cincinnati, he said that if Congress approved the resolution giving him the authority to use force, it did not mean that military action would be “unavoidable”. But he chose not to give the weapons inspectors the time they needed to get the job done and give meaning to the words, going to war as a last resort.

Here in Cincinnati, he promised “to lead a coalition.” But he failed to build a broad, strong coalition of allies and he rushed to war without a plan to win the peace.

Here in Cincinnati, from this hall, on that night, he spoke to the nation, and promised: “If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully. We will act with the full power of the United States military. We will act with allies at our side and we will prevail.”

But then, George W. Bush made the wrong choices. He himself now admits he miscalculated in Iraq. In truth, his miscalculation was ignoring the advice that was given to him, including the best advice of America’s own military. When he didn’t like what he was hearing, he even fired the Army Chief of Staff. His miscalculation was going to war without taking every precaution and without giving the inspectors time. His miscalculation was going to war without planning carefully and without the allies we should have had. As a result, America has paid nearly 90% of the bill in Iraq. Contrast that with the Gulf War, where our allies paid 95% of the costs.

George W. Bush’s wrong choices have led America in the wrong direction in Iraq and left America without the resources we need here at home. The cost of the President’s go-it-alone policy in Iraq is now $200 billion and counting. $200 billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can’t afford after-school programs for our children. $200 billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can’t afford health care for our veterans. $200 billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can’t afford to keep the 100,000 new police we put on the streets during the 1990s.

Well we’re here today to tell them: they’re wrong. And it’s time to lead America in a new direction.

When it comes to Iraq, it’s not that I would have done one thing differently from the President, I would’ve done almost everything differently. I would have given the inspectors the time they needed before rushing to war. I would have built a genuine coalition of our allies around the world. I would’ve made sure that every soldier put in harm’s way had the equipment and body armor they needed. I would’ve listened to the senior military leaders of this country and the bipartisan advice of Congress. And, if there’s one thing I learned from my own service, I would never have gone to war without a plan to win the peace.

I would not have made the wrong choices that are forcing us to pay nearly the entire cost of this war – $200 billion that we’re not investing in education, health care, and job creation here at home.

$200 billion for going-it-alone in Iraq. That’s the wrong choice; that’s the wrong direction; and that’s the wrong leadership for America.

While we’re spending that $200 billion in Iraq, 8 million Americans are looking for work – 2 million more than when George W. Bush took office – and we’re told that we can’t afford to invest in job training and job creation here at home.

[I’m skipping the domestic-policy sections, but you can read the whole thing at Kerry’s site]

Because of this President’s wrong choices, we’re spending $200 billion in Iraq while the costs of health care have gone through the roof and we’re told we don’t have the resources to make health care affordable and available for all Americans . . .

. . . They’re charging 17% more for Medicare while making America pay $200 billion for a go-it-alone policy in Iraq. That’s the wrong choice; that’s the wrong direction; and that’s the wrong leadership for America.

[snip]

Because of George W. Bush’s wrong choices, we’re spending $200 billion in Iraq while we’re running up deficits that threaten Social Security. In fact, they’re raiding the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for their mistakes in Iraq. . . .

[snip]

And because of this President’s wrong choices, we’re spending $200 billion in Iraq instead of investing in making America energy independent. George W. Bush’s energy policy is to trust the big oil companies and the Saudis. In fact, a national news magazine just reported that a senior member of the Saudi Royal family said that as far as they’re concerned, in the U.S. Presidential election, “It’s Bush all the way.” I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation, not the Saudi Royal Family.

We’re going to invest in technology and the vehicles of the future, so that no young American will ever be held hostage to our dependence on oil from the Middle East. That’s the right choice; that’s the right direction; and that’s the right leadership for America.

Because of this President’s wrong choices, we’re spending $200 billion in Iraq while we’re told that we can’t afford to do everything that we should for homeland security. I believe it’s wrong to be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America. It’s wrong to cut money for our first responders. It’s wrong to let 95% of the cargo that comes into this country get by without ever being physically inspected. That’s the wrong choice; that’s the wrong direction; and that’s the wrong leadership for America.

As President, I will set a new direction. We’re going to defend this country here at home. We’re going to do all we possibly can to protect it from another terrorist attack. And we’re going to make homeland security a priority, not a political slogan.

My friends, today we are bearing the cost of the war in Iraq almost alone – $200 billion and counting.

Nearly two years after George W. Bush spoke to the nation from this very place, we know how wrong his choices were. He says he “miscalculated.” He calls Iraq a “catastrophic success.” But a glance at the front pages or a look at the nightly news shows the hard reality: Rising instability. Spreading violence. Growing extremism. Havens for terrorists that weren’t there before. And today, even the Pentagon admits, Entire regions of Iraq are controlled by insurgents and terrorists.

I call this course a catastrophic choice that has cost us $200 billion because we went it alone, and we’ve paid an even more unbearable price in young American lives.

We need a new direction. I know what we need to do in Iraq. We need to bring our allies to our side, share the burdens, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. We need to train Iraqi military and police – we need to train them more rapidly, more effectively, and in greater numbers to take over the job of protecting their own country. That’s what I’ll do as Commander-in-Chief – because that’s the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

[snip]

Report: Bush Plans To Skip One Debate [Updated]

Leading on Drudge right now:

President Bush may skip one of the three debates that have been proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates… MORE… Bush’s negotiating team plans to resist the middle debate, which was to be Oct. 8 in a town meeting format in Missouri // audience of ‘undecided voters’ for second debate was to be picked by Gallup. Bush officials were concerned that people could pose as undecided when they actually are partisans, WASH POST planning to report in new editions, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE

.

Update:

MSNBC has the story.

Zogby: "Kerry On The Ropes"

John Zogby, explaining that it isn’t an 11 point race, says: “Mr. Kerry is on the ropes.”

I have Mr. Bush leading by 2 points in the simple head-to-head match up - 46% to 44%. Add in the other minor candidates and it becomes a 3 point advantage for the President - 46% to 43%. This is no small achievement. The President was behind 50% to 43% in my mid-August poll and he essentially turned the race around by jumping 3 points as Mr. Kerry lost 7 points. Impressive by any standards.

For the first time in my polling this year, Mr. Bush lined up his Republican ducks in a row by receiving 90% support of his own party, went ahead among Independents, and now leads by double-digits among key groups like investors. Also for the first time the President now leads among Catholics. Mr. Kerry is on the ropes.

From California Yankee.

Nader Won't Be on Virginia Ballot

AP: Nader Won’t Be on Virginia Ballot

Independent Ralph Nader will not appear on Virginia’s presidential ballot, the State Board of Elections said Tuesday.

Nader fell short of the required 10,000 certified signatures on his qualifying petitions, said Jean Jensen, secretary of the board. “He needed 10,000 and we were able to verify 7,342,” Jensen said.

Nader had submitted about 12,900 signatures, and officials checked them against local voter lists.

“We’ll review those ourselves — the ones they’ve knocked off — and see if they are accurate,” said Nader spokesman Kevin Zeese. “But if they’re not registered voters, they’re not registered voters.”

Post-Labor Day Toast

PoliBlog’s newest Toast-O-Meter is up.

Short version: Kerry is moving in the direction of French-looking Toast. For the long version, click above.

New 527 Ads Reportedly Attack Sharpton, Willie Horton

The NY Daily News reports that an independent pro-Bush group, “MoveOnForAmerica[, ]led by GOP political consultant Stephen Marks”, is preparing to run two controversial ads. The first targets the Democrats’ embrace of Al Sharpton:

[snip]

Then there’s the second ad:

Note that the Horton-furlough case didn’t happen while Kerry was Dukakis’ Lieutenant Governor. Instead, the ‘hook’ is this:

I’ve got commentary on the ads on my own blog.

Kerry: Iraq "the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Kerry at a Labor Day rally in West Virginia:

USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll: Bush by 7%

USA Today reports that the latest USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll results show President Bush has a 7% lead:

Likely Voters Bush 52% - Kerry 45% - Nader 1%

From California Yankee.

Time And Newsweek Polls May Overstate President Bush's Lead

Rasmussen explains why the Presidential Tracking Poll’s 3-day rolling average finds a 1% lead for President Bush while an the 11% lead for President Bush was found by Time and Newsweek.

Rasmussen says there are two reasons for the difference. First, the tracking poll got bad data on Saturday:

Our current poll (showing the President ahead by just over a point) includes a Saturday sample that is way out of synch with all the days before it and with the Sunday data that followed. In fact, Saturday’s one-day sample showed a big day for Kerry while all the days surrounding it showed a decent lead for the President.

It seems likely that Saturday reflects a rogue sample (especially since it was over a holiday weekend). But, it remains in our 3-day rolling average for one more day (Tuesday’s report). If we drop the Saturday sample from our data, Bush is currently ahead by about 4 percentage points in the Rasmussen Reports Tracking Poll.

Second, Time and Newsweek included too many Republicans:

Four years ago, 35% of voters were Republicans, 39% were Democrats, and the rest were unaffiliated. If you apply those percentages to the Time internals, you find Bush up by about 3 percentage points. If you do the same with the Newsweek internal numbers, you find Bush with a six point lead. Those results are very close to the Rasmussen Reports data (excluding the Saturday sample).

From California Yankee.

The Race Is Now The President's To Lose

Rasmussen reports that President Bush gained more than five percentage points over John Kerry during the past three weeks.

This week, Bush is ahead by nearly three points. The race for the White House, while still very close, is now the President’s to lose.

From California Yankee.

Clinton Tells Kerry To Stop Talking About Vietnam

The New York Times reports that former President Clinton advised Kerry to stop talking about Vietnam:

In an expansive conversation, Mr. Clinton, who is awaiting heart surgery, told Mr. Kerry that he should move away from talking about Vietnam, which had been the central theme of his candidacy, and focus instead on drawing contrasts with President Bush on job creation and health care policies, officials with knowledge of the conversation said.

From California Yankee.

Campaign Finance Reform: 60-day window is here

In case y’all hadn’t noticed, we’re now within 60 days of the election, which means that in theory, 527 groups are now prohibited from running television and radio ads:

Restrictions on “Phony Issue Ads” Run by Corporations and Unions (The Snowe-Jeffords Amendment). First adopted as part of McCain-Feingold during the Senate’s February 1998 campaign finance debate, the Snowe-Jeffords amendment addresses the explosion of thinly-veiled campaign advertising funded by corporate and union treasuries. These ads skirt federal election law by avoiding the use of direct entreaties to “vote for” or “vote against” a particular candidate. Under the bill, labor unions and corporations would be prohibited from spending their treasury funds on “electioneering communications.” “Electioneering communications” are defined as radio or TV ads that refer to a clearly identified candidate or candidates and appear within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. This definition does not include any printed communication, direct mail, voter guides, or the Internet. It would also not cover issue advertising that does not identify a specific candidate or appears outside of the 30/60 day pre-election window.

The Snowe-Jeffords amendment applies to 501©(4) non-profit corporations and incorporated 527 organizations…

Update 9/6: Note that this restriction doesn’t apply to all 527’s, only those that are incorporated or take corporate/union money. If anyone knows a definitive source to identify which 527’s fall into this category and which don’t, please chime in.

So the question becomes: what the hell are the 527’s going to do with any money that they’ve amassed but haven’t spent yet?

One interesting theory is that 527’s may channel advertising dollars online. And hey, I’m all for that. Bring that dirty, filthy campaign lucre right on!

But does anybody have any money left anyway? Easy enough to check, thanks to the invaluable OpenSecrets.org. I pulled down the expenditures and receipts for the top 50 527’s, added columns to show the percentage of their funds that has been spent and their funds remaining, and put it back in a chart again:

So there’s a few interesting observations to be had from this data. First, it’s clear that —- assuming the reporting data is up-to-date —- there’s still decent piles of cash lying in the coffers of some of the major 527’s, including the Democrats’ mega-fund, the Joint Victory Fund, as well as others.

But then there’s the bottom end of the table, which is somewhat odd. Many 527’s have actually spent more than they are reporting as receipts. I would think that there are two explanations for this: first, that the group is in fact spending ahead of donations on credit or debt, or second, that the reporting is simply behind on receipts while it is up-to-date on spending. This makes a certain kind of sense; I presume it is a much less burdensome process to list expenditures than it is to report on all the tiny donations received.

But some of the numbers are wildly out of wack, including those for everyone’s favorite, MoveOn.org. They’ve spent $17M with receipts of only $9M, apparently —- a gap of $8 million. Now that is some fairly shoddy reporting, if you ask me.

But back to the funds that are left. At his current rates, $4,000 will get you an add that runs from here until Election Day over at Instapundit —- and you can even get the top slot for a mere $6,000. Glenn’s current traffic suggests that it’s a safe bet that he’ll get around 10 million visits between now and election day, so his rates are a bargain if there ever was one.

Further down the traffic, over at TTLB, you can run an ad until the end of the campaign for $70. Yes, $70. I mean, that’s less than the price of a power lunch. And while I can’t guarantee Glenn’s mega-visitage, my own traffic hasn’t been too shabby lately (especially in Great Britain, though they don’t vote, I’m told). And somewhere inbetween, here at The Command Post, you can run an add site-wide until Election Day for $300. Cheap, cheap, cheap!

Other blogs are priced similarly, generally with a pretty direct relation between traffic and cost. So it sure seems logical to expect that there might be a flood of political dollars headed our way sometime soon. So to use language that I know both Republicans and Democrats now understand:

Bring. It. On!

PS: Bonus 60-day tidbit: Another odd part of campaign finance regulations is that, believe it or not, Senators are prohibited from updating their own websites within 60 days of an election. Here’s the relevant rule:

During the 60 day period immediately preceding the date of any primary or general election (whether regular, special, or runoff) for any national, state, or local office in which the Senator is a candidate, no Member may place, update or transmit information using a Senate Internet Server (“FTP Server, Gopher, and World Wide Web), unless the candidacy of the Senator in such election is uncontested. Exceptions to this moratorium include the following: posting of press releases, posting of official statements of the member appearing in the Congressional Record, and technical corrections to the website.

Kind of odd, really, but if you can post press releases, I can’t see how it is very much of a restriction.

Originally posted at The Truth Laid Bear

Bush's Big Bounce

Newsweek reports that President Bush got a big bounce from the Republican National Convention. The Newsweek poll finds President Bush has the same 11% lead found by Time - Bush 52% Kerry 41%:

From California Yankee.

Court Orders Michigan Ballot To Include Nader

The Detroit Free Press reports that the Michigan Court of Appeals overruled a state elections panel and ordered Nader’s name to be on the November’s presidential ballot as an independent presidential candidate.

From California Yankee.

Catch of the Day

This time, from the fourth estate, to wit, the Associated Press.

As documented in great detail at Swiming Through the Spin, the AP has engaged in a minor, yet typical, example of journalistic rotation.

From Editor and Publisher :

NEW YORK The Associated Press changed “boos” to “ooohhs” Friday afternoon in reporting on President George Bush’s first statement to supporters on the heart ailment that has befallen former President Bill Clinton.

In a dispatch sent to subscribers in early afternoon, the AP reported that when Bush, at a campaign rally in West Allis, Wisconsin, told the crowd that he wished to send Clinton his “best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery,” the audience “of thousands booed. Bush did nothing to stop them.”

Pretty damning, except that AP soon changed its story, only after the original appeared on many Web sites.

Several Web sites revealed that AP “retracted” the report “citing uncertainties about how to characterize the crowd’s reaction.”

The new version moved on the wire Friday described the same incident this way, after relating Bush’s remarks: “The crowd reacted with applause and with some ‘ooohs,’ apparently surprised by the news that Clinton was ill.”

A Knight Ridder/Tribune (KRT) report put it this way: “Some in Bush’s audience booed when he wished Clinton well….” The AFP wire report declared that after Bush’s statement “thousands of boisterous supporters clapped respectfully.”

Of course thanks to the Blogosphere,more than one audio file of the event is available online, showing a distinct absence of Boos, a complete lack of Oohs, and for that matter, no Kangaroos either.

Being caught injecting fiction into a report (and removing the offending paragraph as AP initially did) is one thing : leaving unequivocal evidence of a really clumsy cover-up attempt afterwards is another.

I fear that ‘Catch of the Day’ may become a semi-regular feature of this site at this rate.

Jenna = Anna?

Only Yahoo! News dares to ask:

Has Jenna Bush become the Anna Kournikova of American Politics?

Americans continue to be more enthralled with the President’s daughter, than with the President himself. Even following the President’s address to the nation last night, Jenna Bush remains more a more sought-after news topic than her father who didn’t even crack the top 15 news topics on Yahoo! News. Jenna has clearly become a staple of American news interest. Her popularity on the list began during the Democratic National Convention, and continues through the completion of the Republican National Convention.

List? Oh, yes … the Yahoo! News most-popular-news-topics list.

Top News Topics on Yahoo! News (based on News searches and story click-throughs)

Friday, September 3, 2004:

1. Russia
2. Beslan
3. Miss Universe
4. Hurricane Frances
5. Iran
6. Chechnya
7. Maria Sharapova
8. China
9. Jenna Bush
10. Russian
11. Jennifer Hawkins
12. Iraq
13. Serena Williams
14. India
15. San Salvador

(Personally, I’ll take a #7 over a #9 any day … and don’t be afraid to toss in a #3 while you’re at it.)

Citation: This is all via Yahoo! email.

Time: Bush Opens Double Digit Lead

Glenn posts the early release:

• 52% Bush
• 41% Kerry
• 3% Nader

Tapped

I’m back in the office and putting in a very full day on very little sleep. I’m tapped out physically and emotionally, but I hope you enjoyed the coverage. It was certainly worth the investment of time and energy on my end, and I hope the reading was worthwhile on yours.

I was able to go because of our readers, so thanks to you. If we ever see each other in a bar, the drink is on me.

Rounding-up the Last Night

The last of PoliBlog’s Bite-Sized Toast reports is now available. Click on by for analysis of the night, and links to both MSM’s and the Blogosphere’s reactions.

Clinton Hospitalized for Heart Surgery

Fox News is reporting that former President Bill Clinton has been admitted to a New York hospital after a blockage was found in his heart. He will undergo bypass surgery.

Flashback: Zell Miller's 1992 Keynote Speech

As commentators discuss the propriety of Zell Miller’s searing attacks on John Kerry and the Democratic leadership in his speech Wednesday night, I thought it would be informative to reprint here his 1992 convention speech, in which he gave the keynote address at another convention in New York, this one nominating Bill Clinton. The text is from here:

Zell Miller’s Keynote Address: Democratic National Convention
NEW YORK, July 13, 1992

Listen to this voice.

It’s a voice flavored by the Blue Ridge; a voice straight out of a remote valley hidden among the peaks and hollows of the Appalachian Mountains - a voice that’s been described as more barbed wire than honeysuckle.

That this kind of voice could travel here from a forgotten corner of Appalachia is a testament to the grace of God and the greatness of the Democratic Party.

This week we are gathered here to nominate a man from a remote, rural corner of Arkansas to be president of the United States of America.

That is powerful proof that the American dream still lives - at least in the Democratic Party.

Bill Clinton is the only candidate for president who feels our pain, shares our hopes and will work his heart out to fulfill our dreams.

You see, I understand why Bill Clinton is so eager to see the American dream kept alive for a new generation.

Because I, too, was a product of that dream.

I was born during the worst of the Depression on a cold winter’s day in the drafty bedroom of a rented house, and I was my parent’s hope for the future.

Franklin Roosevelt was elected that year, and would soon replace generations of neglect with a whirlwind of activity, bringing to our little valley a very welcome supply of God’s most precious commodity - hope.

My father, a teacher, died when I was two weeks old, leaving a young widow with two small children.

But with my mother’s faith in God - and Mr. Roosevelt’s voice on the radio - we kept going.

After my father’s death, my mother with her own hands cleared a small piece of rugged land.

Every day she waded into a neighbor’s cold mountain creek, carrying out thousands of smooth stones to build a house.

I grew up watching my mother complete that house from the rocks she’d lifted from the creek and cement she mixed in a wheelbarrow - cement that today still bears her hand prints.

Her son bears her hand prints, too.

She pressed her pride and her hopes and her dreams deep into my soul.

So, you see, I know what Dan Quayle means when he says it’s best for children to have two parents.

You bet it is!

And it would be nice for them to have trust funds, too.

But we can’t all be born rich and handsome and lucky. That’s why we have a Democratic Party.

My family would still be isolated and destitute if we had not had FDR’s Democratic brand of government. I made it because Franklin Delano Roosevelt energized this nation. I made it because Harry Truman fought for working families like mine. I made it because John Kennedy’s rising tide lifted even our tiny boat.

I made it because Lyndon Johnson showed America that people who were born poor didn’t have to die poor. And I made it because a man with whom I served in the Georgia Senate - a man named Jimmy Carter - brought honesty and decency and integrity to public service.

But what of the kids of today? Who fights for the child of a single mother today? Because without a government that is on their side, those children have no hope. And when a child has no hope, a nation has no future.

I am a Democrat because we are the party of hope. For twelve dark years the Republicans have dealt in cynicism and skepticism. They’ve mastered the art of division and diversion, and they have robbed us of our hope.

Too many mothers today cannot tell their children what my mother told me - that working hard and playing by the rules can make your dreams come true. For millions, the American dream has become what the poet called “a dream deferred.” And if you recall the words of that poet-prophet, he warned us that a dream deferred can explode.

Robbed of hope, the voices of anger rise up, rise up from working Americans, who are tired of paying more in taxes and getting less in services. And George Bush doesn’t get it?

Americans cannot understand why some can buy the best health care in the world, but all the rest of us get is rising costs and cuts in coverage - or no health insurance at all. And George Bush doesn’t get it?

Americans cannot walk our streets in safety, because our ”tough-on-crime” President has waged a phony war on drugs, posing for pictures while cutting police, prosecutors and prisons. And George Bush doesn’t get it?

Americans have seen plants closed down, jobs shipped overseas and our hopes fade away as our economic position collapses right before our very eyes. And George Bush does not get it!

Four years ago, Mr. Bush told us he was a quiet man, who hears the voices of quiet people. Today, we know the truth: George Bush is a timid man who hears only the voices of caution and the status quo.

Let’s face facts: George Bush just doesn’t get it. He doesn’t see it; he doesn’t feel it, and he’s done nothing about it.

That’s why we cannot afford four more years.

If the “education president” gets another term, even our kids won’t be able to spell potato.

If the “law and order president” gets another term, the criminals will run wild, because our commander-in-chief talks like Dirty Harry, but acts like Barney Fife.

If the “environmental president” gets another term, the fish he catches off Kennebunkport will have three eyes.

And folks, after January, George Bush is going to have plenty of time to go fishing.

So much for the millionaire. But we’ve still got ourselves a billionaire. A billionaire!

He says he’s an outsider who will shake up the system in Washington. But as far back as 1974 he was lobbying Congress for tax breaks. He tried to turn $55,000 in contributions into a special $15 million tax loophole that was tailor-made for him. Sounds to me like instead of shaking the system up, Mr. Perot’s been shaking it down.

Ross says he’ll clean out the barn, but he’s been knee deep in it for years.

If Ross Perot’s an outsider, folks, I’m from Brooklyn. Mr. Perot’s giving us salesmanship, not leadership. And we’re not buying it.

And so the choice in this election is clear - we’ve got us a race between an aristocrat, an autocrat and a Democrat.

I know who I’m for. I’m for Bill Clinton because he is a Democrat who does not have to read a book or be briefed about the struggles of single-parent families, or what it means to work hard for everything he’s ever received in life.

There was no silver spoon in sight when he was born, three months after his father died. No one ever gave Bill Clinton a free ride as he worked his way through college and law school. And the people at Yale couldn’t believe it when he turned down a good job in Washington to return to Arkansas and teach.

Bill Clinton is a Democrat who has the courage to tell some of those liberals who think welfare should continue forever, and some of those conservatives who think there should be no welfare at all, that they’re both wrong. He’s a Democrat who will move people off the welfare rolls and onto the job rolls.

Bill Clinton is a Democrat who has the courage to lead a real war on crime here at home. And around the world he will be the kind of commander-in-chief this old Marine sergeant would be proud to follow.

That either one of us was able, one growing up in an Appalachian valley and the other in rural Arkansas, to eventually become governors of our states is a tribute to the American dream and yes, the Democratic Party that makes it a reality.

When I was growing up back in the mountains, whenever I felt like one of life’s losers, my mother used to point to the one and only paved road in our valley - a narrow little strip that disappeared winding its way through a distant gap – and she’d say, “You know what’s so great about this place? You can get anywhere in the world from here.”

Thanks to her and to God, the United States Marine Corps and the Democratic Party, I did go somewhere. But I’ve never really left that mountain valley. Shirley and I, our children and their children still live in the Appalachian town of Young Harris, Georgia, and tonight, one of my sons is sitting in front of the television set in the living room of that same rock house my mother and her neighbors built so many years ago.

Tonight, let our message be heard in every living room in every home in America. Wherever families and friends are gathered, let them know this:

We have a leader and a party and a platform that says to the everyday working people of this country: We will fight your fight; we will ease your burden; we will carry your cause.

We will hear all the voices of America - from the silky harmonies of the Gospel choirs to the rough-edged rhythms of a hot country band; from the razor’s edge rap of the inner city to the soaring beauty of the finest soprano.

We hear your voice, America.

We hear your voice. We will answer your call. We will keep the faith. And we will restore your hope.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless America.

Three debates "too many" says Bush strategist

The Arizona Republic is reporting that a member of the Bush campaign is saying that a third debate is unnecessary and would needlessly “dominate the entire fall schedule.”

“Three debates would have a tendency to be a little overbearing on your campaign strategy and tactics,” Reed was quoted as saying.

On Thursday, after Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman visited a breakfast of the Arizona delegation to the Republican National Convention here, he refused to elaborate when asked whether that was the Bush campaign’s position.

“Debates are always very important,” Mehlman said.

But will Bush agree to all three of the commission dates, including the one in Arizona?

“We’ll see,” he said.

In later calls to The Arizona Republic, Bush campaign aides asking not to be identified insisted that Reed was not speaking officially for the campaign and that no decision had been made on the debates.

Cheney, Bush labelled 'Draft Dodgers'

From the AP via The Australian :

US Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry hit back at George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the Republican National Convention today by labelling the President and Vice President draft dodgers.
[…]
“We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican convention,” Mr Kerry remarked.
[…]
Mr Kerry’s running mate, Senator John Edwards, also made comment on the Republican barbs that were fired yesterday and today.

”There was a lot of hate coming from that podium,” he said of the one-two political punches by Mr Miller and Mr Cheney.

Kerry's Midnight Madness

Striking back less than an hour after the completion of the Republican National Convention, where he was the subject of countless GOP barbs, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry re-entered the fray, calling President Bush “unfit to lead this nation.”

“I have five words for America: This is your wake-up call,” the Massachusetts senator told a cheering crowd at a midnight rally in Springfield, Ohio.

“We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican convention,” Kerry said. “For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander-in-chief.

“Well, here’s my answer: I’m not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.”

Read more…

AFP : Kerry Takes Lead in New Poll

From the AFP, via The Australian :

A new opinion poll released today gives Democratic US presidential contender John Kerry a slight lead over Republican incumbent George W. Bush.

The American Research Group poll of 1014 people gave 48 per cent of voter support to Mr Kerry and 46 per cent to Mr Bush.
[…]
The poll also indicated a growing number of Americans do not approve the president’s policies - 48 per cent against and 45 per cent in favour - and a majority oppose his economic policy, 51 per cent to 43 per cent.

AP 'News'

From the AP via The Australian comes what is supposedly not an Op-Ed, but an (uncredited) objective account of George Bush’s speech.

An unpopular war and 1.1 million lost jobs is enough to kill a presidency, so President George W Bush has tried to make the US election about something else: himself and his leadership style.
[…]
Rare to admit mistakes, Mr Bush submitted to a few - arrogant, too blunt and cocky, and explained them away with laugh lines.

But he didn’t give an inch on the matters that matter most, a war in Iraq that has cost the lives of nearly 1,000 US troops, and a job-loss record that rivals Depression-era President Herbert Hoover.

These two issues are fuelling a sense of unease among voters, with nearly 60 per cent saying the nation is headed in the wrong direction.
[…]
Stick with me, Mr Bush said. By a 3-to-1 margin, people think the war in Iraq increased rather than decreased the threat of terrorism, and a solid majority don’t think Mr Bush has a clear plan for bringing the Iraq war to a successful resolution.

He offered none in the speech, promising to bring troops home “as soon as possible,” when Iraq is secure and democratic.

Mr Bush defended the war by tying it, with the slenderest of threads, to the September 11, 2001, attacks.
[…]
On the domestic front, Mr Bush said, “We’ve seen an economy rise to its feet” and ticked off a laundry list of small-bore initiatives to keep it rising - a concept that might be hard to grasp in hard-hit Ohio.
[…]
After months of courting conservatives, Mr Bush dusted off his four-year-old “compassionate conservative” slogan and a poll-tested agenda to boot.

Return To New York

6 a.m. and Penn Station is getting back to normal, with 7th and 32nd again belonging to its rightful owners: the cabbies of New York.

This morning the streets were quiet, and MSG looked no more unusual than if it had just hosted Elton John for the 38th time.

Special thanks from me to the NYPD, who did a hell of a job throughout.