Well, I'm not sure I know what to make of this story. I personally don't care if it's true -- I mean the idea that Senator Clinton may be "Bi" -- but I think the allegations are totally stupid.
I mean she's got an aide who answers the phone late at night. Ok. It's a campaign and people are at the house -- working. Big deal? Well, the story started with the acid-text of Village Voice writer Michael Musto August 7th , when the gossip was fairly burried deep in his column of the day, but seems to jump out at the eye like a full moon.
What's happened since is this story's hit Matt Drudge's website, The London TImes, and even online 'zine's like "CO-ED Magazine" which is targeted to college students. Since lesbian relationships have become a new right of passage, Senator Clinton may have picked up a new class of voters. The question is will she lose the more traditional voter in Iowa just by the fact that the story will not die?
We shall see.
I can say that even though I'm an Obama supporter, I feel sorry for Senator Clinton here. I mean she had to deal with President Clinton's love for flirting and beyond and now rumors of an affair not with a man but a woman while she's running for President.
Not a cool place to be. But one wonders why this story persists -- it's resulted in about 44,000 search results on Google.
I think the reasons behind this may be rather sinister, but not in the way you think...
Plus, if it's not true, kill it. I want Obama to win, then pick Hil as his VP.
Perfect.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Amanda Congdon't Last ABC Video-Blog (Vlog)
Although Amanda actually annouced her departure from ABC about three months ago, she was still working. But time has past and now Amanda's just posted her last video-blog (vlog) for ABC.
In her video Amanda gives a rather telling comment regarding learning a lot about "traditional media." From my perspective, ABC never really understood what they had in Amanda, and thus didn't benefit from her technical knoweldge.
Here's Amanda on Blip.tv...
TechCrunch's Arrington Interviews Barack Obama On Tech Issues
A great interview which shows the Senator's command of key Internet issues facing us.
Q&A With Senator Barack Obama
Net Neutrality
Michael Arrington: What is your position on net neutrality? Specifically, should tiered pricing be allowed by the access providers?
Senator Barack Obama: As I stated during my visit to Google on November 14, I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality. The Internet is the most open network in history. We have to keep it that way. I will prevent network providers from discriminating in ways that limit the freedom of expression on the Internet. Because most Americans only have a choice of only one or two broadband carriers, carriers are tempted to impose a toll charge on content and services, discriminating against websites that are unwilling to pay for equal treatment. This could create a two-tier Internet in which websites with the best relationships with network providers can get the fastest access to consumers, while all competing websites remain in a slower lane. Such a result would threaten innovation, the open tradition and architecture of the Internet, and competition among content and backbone providers. It would also threaten the equality of speech through which the Internet has begun to transform American political and cultural discourse. Accordingly, network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or non-profit speakers, have the same opportunity as incumbents to innovate on the Internet and to reach large audiences. I will protect the Internet’s traditional openness to innovation and creativity and ensure that it remains a platform for free speech and innovation that will benefit consumers and our democracy.
Privacy
MA: Should the government involve itself in protecting personal privacy online? Since current measures are doing little to solve the problem, what do you think can be done to address the issue?
BO: Dramatic increases in computing power, decreases in storage costs and the huge flows of information that characterize the digital age bring enormous benefits, but also create risk of abuse. We need sensible safeguards that protect privacy in this dynamic new world. As president, I will strengthen privacy protections for the digital age and will harness the power of technology to hold government and business accountable for violations of personal privacy.
Specifically, I will do the following:
To ensure that powerful databases containing information on Americans that are necessary tools in the fight against terrorism are not misused for other purposes, I support restrictions on how information may be used and technology safeguards to verify how the information has actually been used.
I support updating surveillance laws and ensuring that law enforcement investigations and intelligence-gathering relating to U.S. citizens are done only under the rule of law.
I will also work to provide robust protection against misuses of particularly sensitive kinds of information, such as e-health records and location data that do not fit comfortably within sector-specific privacy laws.
I will increase the Federal Trade Commission’s enforcement budget and will step up international cooperation to track down cyber-criminals so that U.S. law enforcement can better prevent and punish spam, spyware, telemarketing and phishing intrusions into the privacy of American homes and computers.
Mobile Spectrum Auctions and Rules
MA: What is your position on the mobile spectrum? Should government force open access or should it simply auction it off to the highest bidder and let the carriers decide what types of services to offer?
BO: I will confront the entrenched Washington interests that have kept our public airwaves from being maximized for the public’s interest. As president, I will demand a review of existing uses of our wireless spectrum. My bottom line is that rural America needs more and better wireless broadband service, networks should be as open to innovation as possible, and the consumer needs greater freedom and choice. We must make sure the nation’s airwaves are licensed to maximize their public benefit. Auctions have most recently been conducted without sufficient incentives to encourage full use and competition. With respect to the upcoming 700 megahertz auction, many experts believe that this spectrum in question is the last remaining available space in the airwaves for auction with the promise to get wireless broadband deployed to every community. I would have gone further than the Federal Communications Commission has done to date to make sure that this spectrum will be used and open to innovation, but I support the direction the FCC is moving in toward more competition and encouraging new entrants into this market and I will direct my administration’s FCC to continue moving in that direction.
The Digital Divide
MA: What is your opinion of the E-rate program? What else can be done to increase access to technology in our schools? What can be done outside of schools to address the digital divide more generally?
BO: I consider the E-rate program a success because it has helped make broadband nearly ubiquitous in America’s public schools and I am honored that Reed Hundt and Bill Kennard, the FCC Chairmen under President Clinton who oversaw the plan’s creation and implementation, have chosen to endorse my candidacy for President. Unfortunately, we have not made further progress under the Bush Administration and I will recommit America to ensuring that our schools, libraries, households and hospitals have access to next generation broadband networks. I will also make sure that there are adequate training and other supplementary resources to allow every school, library and hospital to take full advantage of the broadband connectivity. In terms of bridging the digital divide outside of schools, I will reform the two major programs which can drive broadband into underserved communities. I described a bold approach to reforming spectrum policies in the previous question. In addition, my administration will establish a multi-year plan with a date certain to change the Universal Service Fund program from one that supports voice communications to one that supports affordable broadband, with a specific focus on reaching previously un-served communities. Finally, I will encourage innovation at the local level through federal support of public/private partnerships that deliver broadband to communities without real broadband.
Education
MA: How would you define “technically literate?” What technology skills should every eighth grader possess? What do you think is the best way to reach the goal?
BO: To me, technical literacy means ensuring that all public school children are equipped with the necessary science, technology and math skills to succeed in the 21st century economy. As president, I will make math and science education a national priority and provide our schools with the tools to educate 21st century learners. Access to computers and broadband connections in public schools must be coupled with qualified teachers, engaging curricula, and a commitment to developing skills in the field of technology. All children must have access to strong math and science curriculum at all grade levels, including the pre-K level. That’s why I will also invest in research and development in science education to determine what types of curriculum and instruction work best. At the college level, I will work to increase our number of science and engineering graduates, encourage undergraduates studying math and science to pursue graduate studies, and work to increase the representation of minorities and women in the science and technology pipeline, tapping the diversity of America to meet the increasing demand for a skilled workforce. If we export our best software and engineering jobs to developing countries, it is less likely that America will benefit from the next generation innovations in nanotechnology, electronics, and biotechnology. We must have a skilled workforce so that we can retain and grow jobs requiring 21st century skills rather than forcing employers to find skilled workers abroad.
Internet and Taxes
MA: What is your position on Internet-only taxes? What is your position on the capital gains tax rate? What is your position on the way venture capitalists should be taxed on carried interest?
BO: Internet-Only Taxes: I support the moratorium on Internet-only taxes and will support all efforts to keep the Internet tax free.
Capital Gains Taxes: I will promote tax fairness by adjusting the top dividends and capital gains rate to a level that would be closer to, but no higher than, the rates set during the Reagan Administration in 1986.
Carried Interest: I will close the carried interest loophole.
Immigration and H1B Visas
MA: What is your position on H1B visas in general? Do you believe the number of H1B visas should be increased?
BO: Highly skilled immigrants have contributed significantly to our domestic technology industry. But we have a skills shortage, not a worker shortage. There are plenty of Americans who could be filling tech jobs given the proper training. I am committed to investing in communities and people who have not had an opportunity to work and participate in the Internet economy as anything other than consumers. Most H-1B new arrivals, for example, have earned a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent abroad (42.5%). They are not all PhDs. We can and should produce more Americans with bachelor’s degrees that lead to jobs in technology. A report of the National Science Foundation (NSF) reveals that blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans as a whole comprise more that 25% of the population but earn, as a whole, 16% of the bachelor degrees, 11% of the master’s degrees, and 5% of the doctorate degrees in science and engineering. We can do better than that and go a long way toward meeting industry’s need for skilled workers with Americans. Until we have achieved that, I will support a temporary increase in the H-1B visa program as a stopgap measure until we can reform our immigration system comprehensively. I support comprehensive immigration reform that includes improvement in our visa programs, including our legal permanent resident visa programs and temporary programs including the H-1B program, to attract some of the world’s most talented people to America. We should allow immigrants who earn their degrees in the U.S. to stay, work, and become Americans over time. As part of our comprehensive reform, we should examine our ability to replace a stopgap increase in the number of H1B visas with an increase in the number of permanent visas we issue to foreign skilled workers. I will also work to ensure immigrant workers are less dependent on their employers for their right to stay in the country and would hold accountable employers who abuse the system and their workers.
Intellectual Property
MA: Do you think changes are needed in the way the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reviews and grants patents?
BO: I know that it is essential we have a system that produces timely, high-quality patents. By improving predictability and clarity in our patent system, we will help foster an environment that encourages innovation. Giving the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the resources to improve patent quality and opening up the patent process to citizen review will reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation. With better informational resources, the Patent and Trademark Office could offer patent applicants who know they have significant inventions the option of a rigorous and public peer review that would produce a “gold-plated” patent much less vulnerable to court challenge. Where dubious patents are being asserted, the PTO could conduct low-cost, timely administrative proceedings to determine patent validity. As president, I will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and collaboration.
Renewable Energy
MA: Should carbon emissions be taxed? What will you do to encourage U.S. innovation into renewable/sustainable energy sources?
BO: I support implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately in my administration by establishing strong annual reduction targets, and I’ll also implement a mandate of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. I will use some of the revenue generated from the cap-and-trade permit auction to invest in climate-friendly energy development and deployment. This will transform the economy and create millions of new jobs. I will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial scale renewable energy, invest in low emissions coal plants, and begin transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.
Q&A With Senator Barack Obama
Net Neutrality
Michael Arrington: What is your position on net neutrality? Specifically, should tiered pricing be allowed by the access providers?
Senator Barack Obama: As I stated during my visit to Google on November 14, I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality. The Internet is the most open network in history. We have to keep it that way. I will prevent network providers from discriminating in ways that limit the freedom of expression on the Internet. Because most Americans only have a choice of only one or two broadband carriers, carriers are tempted to impose a toll charge on content and services, discriminating against websites that are unwilling to pay for equal treatment. This could create a two-tier Internet in which websites with the best relationships with network providers can get the fastest access to consumers, while all competing websites remain in a slower lane. Such a result would threaten innovation, the open tradition and architecture of the Internet, and competition among content and backbone providers. It would also threaten the equality of speech through which the Internet has begun to transform American political and cultural discourse. Accordingly, network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or non-profit speakers, have the same opportunity as incumbents to innovate on the Internet and to reach large audiences. I will protect the Internet’s traditional openness to innovation and creativity and ensure that it remains a platform for free speech and innovation that will benefit consumers and our democracy.
Privacy
MA: Should the government involve itself in protecting personal privacy online? Since current measures are doing little to solve the problem, what do you think can be done to address the issue?
BO: Dramatic increases in computing power, decreases in storage costs and the huge flows of information that characterize the digital age bring enormous benefits, but also create risk of abuse. We need sensible safeguards that protect privacy in this dynamic new world. As president, I will strengthen privacy protections for the digital age and will harness the power of technology to hold government and business accountable for violations of personal privacy.
Specifically, I will do the following:
To ensure that powerful databases containing information on Americans that are necessary tools in the fight against terrorism are not misused for other purposes, I support restrictions on how information may be used and technology safeguards to verify how the information has actually been used.
I support updating surveillance laws and ensuring that law enforcement investigations and intelligence-gathering relating to U.S. citizens are done only under the rule of law.
I will also work to provide robust protection against misuses of particularly sensitive kinds of information, such as e-health records and location data that do not fit comfortably within sector-specific privacy laws.
I will increase the Federal Trade Commission’s enforcement budget and will step up international cooperation to track down cyber-criminals so that U.S. law enforcement can better prevent and punish spam, spyware, telemarketing and phishing intrusions into the privacy of American homes and computers.
Mobile Spectrum Auctions and Rules
MA: What is your position on the mobile spectrum? Should government force open access or should it simply auction it off to the highest bidder and let the carriers decide what types of services to offer?
BO: I will confront the entrenched Washington interests that have kept our public airwaves from being maximized for the public’s interest. As president, I will demand a review of existing uses of our wireless spectrum. My bottom line is that rural America needs more and better wireless broadband service, networks should be as open to innovation as possible, and the consumer needs greater freedom and choice. We must make sure the nation’s airwaves are licensed to maximize their public benefit. Auctions have most recently been conducted without sufficient incentives to encourage full use and competition. With respect to the upcoming 700 megahertz auction, many experts believe that this spectrum in question is the last remaining available space in the airwaves for auction with the promise to get wireless broadband deployed to every community. I would have gone further than the Federal Communications Commission has done to date to make sure that this spectrum will be used and open to innovation, but I support the direction the FCC is moving in toward more competition and encouraging new entrants into this market and I will direct my administration’s FCC to continue moving in that direction.
The Digital Divide
MA: What is your opinion of the E-rate program? What else can be done to increase access to technology in our schools? What can be done outside of schools to address the digital divide more generally?
BO: I consider the E-rate program a success because it has helped make broadband nearly ubiquitous in America’s public schools and I am honored that Reed Hundt and Bill Kennard, the FCC Chairmen under President Clinton who oversaw the plan’s creation and implementation, have chosen to endorse my candidacy for President. Unfortunately, we have not made further progress under the Bush Administration and I will recommit America to ensuring that our schools, libraries, households and hospitals have access to next generation broadband networks. I will also make sure that there are adequate training and other supplementary resources to allow every school, library and hospital to take full advantage of the broadband connectivity. In terms of bridging the digital divide outside of schools, I will reform the two major programs which can drive broadband into underserved communities. I described a bold approach to reforming spectrum policies in the previous question. In addition, my administration will establish a multi-year plan with a date certain to change the Universal Service Fund program from one that supports voice communications to one that supports affordable broadband, with a specific focus on reaching previously un-served communities. Finally, I will encourage innovation at the local level through federal support of public/private partnerships that deliver broadband to communities without real broadband.
Education
MA: How would you define “technically literate?” What technology skills should every eighth grader possess? What do you think is the best way to reach the goal?
BO: To me, technical literacy means ensuring that all public school children are equipped with the necessary science, technology and math skills to succeed in the 21st century economy. As president, I will make math and science education a national priority and provide our schools with the tools to educate 21st century learners. Access to computers and broadband connections in public schools must be coupled with qualified teachers, engaging curricula, and a commitment to developing skills in the field of technology. All children must have access to strong math and science curriculum at all grade levels, including the pre-K level. That’s why I will also invest in research and development in science education to determine what types of curriculum and instruction work best. At the college level, I will work to increase our number of science and engineering graduates, encourage undergraduates studying math and science to pursue graduate studies, and work to increase the representation of minorities and women in the science and technology pipeline, tapping the diversity of America to meet the increasing demand for a skilled workforce. If we export our best software and engineering jobs to developing countries, it is less likely that America will benefit from the next generation innovations in nanotechnology, electronics, and biotechnology. We must have a skilled workforce so that we can retain and grow jobs requiring 21st century skills rather than forcing employers to find skilled workers abroad.
Internet and Taxes
MA: What is your position on Internet-only taxes? What is your position on the capital gains tax rate? What is your position on the way venture capitalists should be taxed on carried interest?
BO: Internet-Only Taxes: I support the moratorium on Internet-only taxes and will support all efforts to keep the Internet tax free.
Capital Gains Taxes: I will promote tax fairness by adjusting the top dividends and capital gains rate to a level that would be closer to, but no higher than, the rates set during the Reagan Administration in 1986.
Carried Interest: I will close the carried interest loophole.
Immigration and H1B Visas
MA: What is your position on H1B visas in general? Do you believe the number of H1B visas should be increased?
BO: Highly skilled immigrants have contributed significantly to our domestic technology industry. But we have a skills shortage, not a worker shortage. There are plenty of Americans who could be filling tech jobs given the proper training. I am committed to investing in communities and people who have not had an opportunity to work and participate in the Internet economy as anything other than consumers. Most H-1B new arrivals, for example, have earned a bachelor’s degree or its equivalent abroad (42.5%). They are not all PhDs. We can and should produce more Americans with bachelor’s degrees that lead to jobs in technology. A report of the National Science Foundation (NSF) reveals that blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans as a whole comprise more that 25% of the population but earn, as a whole, 16% of the bachelor degrees, 11% of the master’s degrees, and 5% of the doctorate degrees in science and engineering. We can do better than that and go a long way toward meeting industry’s need for skilled workers with Americans. Until we have achieved that, I will support a temporary increase in the H-1B visa program as a stopgap measure until we can reform our immigration system comprehensively. I support comprehensive immigration reform that includes improvement in our visa programs, including our legal permanent resident visa programs and temporary programs including the H-1B program, to attract some of the world’s most talented people to America. We should allow immigrants who earn their degrees in the U.S. to stay, work, and become Americans over time. As part of our comprehensive reform, we should examine our ability to replace a stopgap increase in the number of H1B visas with an increase in the number of permanent visas we issue to foreign skilled workers. I will also work to ensure immigrant workers are less dependent on their employers for their right to stay in the country and would hold accountable employers who abuse the system and their workers.
Intellectual Property
MA: Do you think changes are needed in the way the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reviews and grants patents?
BO: I know that it is essential we have a system that produces timely, high-quality patents. By improving predictability and clarity in our patent system, we will help foster an environment that encourages innovation. Giving the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the resources to improve patent quality and opening up the patent process to citizen review will reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation. With better informational resources, the Patent and Trademark Office could offer patent applicants who know they have significant inventions the option of a rigorous and public peer review that would produce a “gold-plated” patent much less vulnerable to court challenge. Where dubious patents are being asserted, the PTO could conduct low-cost, timely administrative proceedings to determine patent validity. As president, I will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and collaboration.
Renewable Energy
MA: Should carbon emissions be taxed? What will you do to encourage U.S. innovation into renewable/sustainable energy sources?
BO: I support implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately in my administration by establishing strong annual reduction targets, and I’ll also implement a mandate of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. I will use some of the revenue generated from the cap-and-trade permit auction to invest in climate-friendly energy development and deployment. This will transform the economy and create millions of new jobs. I will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial scale renewable energy, invest in low emissions coal plants, and begin transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.
Al Gore Has Private Meeting With President Bush - Press Secretary Dana Perino Doesn't Know What Was Discussed
This is the full transcript of today's White House Press Conference, where White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said she "did not psychoanalyze the President" in response to why President Bush met privately with Al Gore. Read the rest here.
Press Briefing by Dana Perino
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
2:46 P.M. EST
MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Sorry to be a little bit later today, but it was for good reason. I have a couple of statements by the President -- these are in his words -- one on Russia, and one on Senator Lott. And then I'll have a little bit of information for you about the meetings he's had today.
The first is a statement about Russia. The President's words: I am deeply concerned about the detention of numerous human rights activists and political leaders who participated in peaceful rallies this weekend. I am particularly troubled by the use of force by law enforcement authorities to stop these peaceful activities and to prevent some journalists and human rights activists from covering them.
The freedoms of expression, assembly and press, as well as due process are fundamental to any democratic society. I am hopeful that the government of Russia will honor its international obligations in these areas, investigate allegations of abuses and free those who remain in detention.
Now, secondly, on Senator Lott: For more than three decades Trent Lott has been an outstanding advocate in the United States Congress for both the people of Mississippi and every United States citizen. With service in the Republican leadership in both the House of Representatives and the Senate he has skillfully advanced legislation and effectively championed key principles of our party, including low taxes and a strong national defense.
Trent has worked to enhance the economic vitality of our nation and his home state throughout his career. By focusing on the important defense, transportation, infrastructure, agriculture and educational needs of Mississippi, he has helped bring new development and opportunity to his constituents. Throughout his service Trent has always been a leader, someone his colleagues have known they could count on to stay true to his principles while working cooperatively to achieve results for the American people. Trent enjoyed bipartisan respect because of his reverence for the institutions of Congress, and because Republicans and Democrats knew they could count on him to keep his commitments and his word. His immense talents will be missed in our Nation's Capital. Laura and I wish him and his wife Tricia all the best.
Stepping back into my own voice, the President today had good meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Abbas today. Representatives of more than 40 countries are gathering here tonight at the State Department and tomorrow in Annapolis to demonstrate the international resolve to seize this important opportunity to advance freedom and peace in the Middle East.
This conference will show the international support that exists for the Israelis' and the Palestinians' goal to start negotiations on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the realization of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It will also provide an opportunity for the Israelis, the Palestinians and their neighbors to recommit to implementing the road map. And the conference will review Palestinian plans to build the institutions of a democratic state, and their preparations for next month's Donor Conference in Paris on the 17th.
The President is personally committed to implementing his vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, and looks forward to speaking tonight -- he will give a toast at the dinner -- and tomorrow in Annapolis.
Q Can you tell us what he's doing in these meetings? Is he giving a pep talk to these leaders? Is he asking them to make concessions? Could you give more description?
MS. PERINO: The President, in these meetings, is encouraging the two leaders. First and foremost, he is saying that he is proud of them, for them to get to this moment. These are two leaders who have the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security as their intention. This is the first time that we have had this, and that's why the President is encouraging them in these meetings to seize this opportunity.
One of the things that the President said in the meetings is that history is full of missed opportunities, because people would focus only on the downside. And he is encouraging them to work together, to use this as a launching pad for the negotiations that the two leaders have said that they want to conclude before the end of the President's term.
Q Was that the President who said history is full of --
MS. PERINO: That is exactly what he said. He said, "History is full of missed opportunities, because people just looked to the downside." And he encouraged them to seize the moment.
Q When you remarked on the President's deep concern for what's happening in Russia, and you cited some reasons why -- but the President, when referring to Pakistan, said that Musharraf had not crossed a line, even though many of the same kind of events -- jailing political activists, the media --
MS. PERINO: Remember, though, that was on the day -- that the President said that -- that was on the day that President Musharraf had just released 3,100 people who had been detained. And the President was referring to him working to get back on the path to a democracy. And so we had called for all of those who had been detained in Pakistan to be released immediately, as well, and for people to be allowed to gather, for the press freedoms to be returned. And in this regard, in terms of Russia, again, this is a country that the President believes will only be strengthened if more people have a say in the political process, if they hear more voices. And that's why he issued the statement today.
Q Can you describe for us what is happening with former Vice President Albert Gore being here with the President? Can you give us a little picture inside of the Oval?
MS. PERINO: I just left the meeting with President Abbas, and I did not have a chance to see Vice President Gore. But that meeting is, I think, underway as we speak, in the Oval Office.
Q You might want to go check in on it and come back and tell us about it. We'll wait.
MS. PERINO: I think the President has seen plenty enough of me today. The President and the Vice President are having a private meeting today. The President invited him to come and spend a little bit of time with him in the Oval Office prior to the event that he's having in the Oval Office, in order to give thanks to the Noble Prize recipients who have represented America so well, of which Al Gore is a part.
Q The former Vice President has been deeply critical of this President's conduct in several areas. Do you think they're still upset with one another? Is there still bad blood here?
MS. PERINO: I don't believe so. I know this President does not harbor any resentments. He never has. He's -- he was the one who picked up the phone to call Vice President Gore to make sure that he could make it to the event. He invited him to come and have a meeting with him prior to the Nobel Prize event, and I think he was very much looking forward to having the meeting.
It's remarkable that in our system of government we have this tradition where political rivals can put that behind them and get together and have a good conversation, and -- also the good of, in this case, Al Gore's focusing on climate change. The President has had a full seven years, with one more year to go, and I think that they'll probably have a good meeting.
Q In your statement, you said something the two had hoped for some sort of conclusion?
MS. PERINO: President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert have both said that they would like to conclude this round of negotiations before the President leaves office.
Q Conclude it with what?
MS. PERINO: With getting to a permanent agreement for two states living side by side in peace and security.
Q Before the President leaves office?
MS. PERINO: That's what they've said.
Q So that's their timetable now?
MS. PERINO: That is what they've said.
Q Would you expect them to commit to that after tomorrow's conference?
MS. PERINO: I don't know what they all say tomorrow. I haven't seen their speeches, but they have said it publicly before, so I don't know why they would not say it -- and they both said it again in these meetings today, so I don't see why that would be any different tomorrow.
Q -- conclude an agreement by the end of the --
Q I'm sorry, they didn't say it to us. They said it to the President, though?
MS. PERINO: Yes. They said it in those meetings.
Q Does that mean actual creation of a Palestinian state by then, or just --
MS. PERINO: I think it's the negotiations in order to get to that point. And implementation of the road map, of course, has to be a part of this. This is -- it's going to be difficult, it's going to take some time, and I think we all have to be realistic about that. But this -- the President believes that the opportunity is right in order to seize this time, because you have two leaders who are willing to recognize that a Palestinian state is important not just for the Palestinians, but also for Israeli security. We have in President Abbas a person who wants to stop the violence, and doesn't believe that terror is a way to get to Palestinian security, and the type of life that they want to have and that they deserve. And so tomorrow
-- we'll have those speeches tomorrow, and then we'll hopefully have more for you later in the afternoon tomorrow.
Q On Russia, does the President, having embraced Putin so early in his administration, does he feel that he misjudged Putin? Is he disappointed?
MS. PERINO: This is a question that the President has gotten over and over again over the past several months. Here's the President's point: He believes that the best opportunity for Russia is to have a democracy. And there had been some movement towards democracy in many different areas, including in the press and certainly in the economy. But there have been steps backwards, as well.
Democracies aren't developed overnight. We know that from our own history. The President has a good relationship with Putin and he treats him with respect, and that is the best in order to work with them. Remember, we are working with Russia cooperatively on many different issues, including Iran, and Russia is part of the Quartet that is working towards Middle East peace. So we have a relationship with them. We have, and continue to be in communication and dialogue with them. And of course our embassy officials had been in contact with the Russian government there in Moscow.
Q And he doesn't feel that he misjudged him? I mean, after the seeming embrace of Ahmadinejad and all these anti-democratic measures, he doesn't feel that perhaps he judged Putin too early?
MS. PERINO: No, the President believes that what he saw in Putin is what is there. What is difficult when you're trying to establish democracies and freedoms across the world is that it just takes time, and it's difficult, and their history is not one of democracy and freedom and liberty. A middle class had grown up within Russia, and within Pakistan, and you have people who want to have a voice and to participate in the political process. And because of that, there sometimes might be uncomfortable government officials who are dealing with that and reacting in the wrong way.
Our obligation, as people who have the benefit of living in freedom and peace and liberty, is to help get them back on that path to a stronger democracy. The President believes the best way for Russia to prosper in the future is to have its people -- for the people that live in Russia, the opportunity to participate in the political process, to be able to have freedom of movement, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly -- and all of those things are just going to take some time.
Q Did Olmert and Abbas discuss specific steps, with the President, that they were prepared to offer as a sign of good faith, such as freezing settlements, those types of things?
MS. PERINO: These meetings were much more general, talking about the launch of the negotiations. Remember, Secretary Rice has been in the region eight or nine times this year alone, and those details are usually talked about in her meetings and, of course, David Welch, along with his counterparts, in the region. And so these meetings were a little bit more general in talking about the goal of this meeting, which is to start the negotiations, to launch the negotiations. And the President asked them to focus on the day after Annapolis, not just Annapolis, but where do they go the day after.
Q How does the President believe that peace can be reached without including Hamas in this equation?
MS. PERINO: The President believes -- there will only be one Palestinian state. And it is going to be difficult work, and it's going to take some time for the Palestinians to work through the situation with Hamas right now. They are under obligation to do that, and will have to -- will have to work with this international community.
Remember, one thing that is different about the conference tomorrow is that you have over 40 countries here, and you have Arab participation. And this is not so that the world can meddle in the negotiations, but so that they can support the negotiations. This agreement is going to be between the Israelis and the Palestinians. And at the end of that agreement, when they reach what they can agree on, then the world should support them. That is what the President talked about with them a lot, as well, which is that you have this opportunity, where you have international interests and support, as well as a Donors Conference that is coming up, and to have everyone at the table is an opportunity to get everything out, so that everyone can start working towards these negotiations that will take place over the next year.
Q But, Dana, when you talk about seizing an opportunity, why did it take the President almost seven years to take on a more active role in this process?
MS. PERINO: Ed, I think that anyone who -- I have seen the storyline over the past week as we've led up to this conference, and I think that, first and foremost, I would ask you just to take a step back and look at what the President has done. He was the first President to call for a Palestinian state. That was a big step. And the Palestinians recognize that, Israel recognized that; the world woke up to the fact that this President was the one that said --
Q He didn't --
MS. PERINO: -- in order to have a peace in the region, you had to have a Palestinian state.
Q Well, what if he did actually make that a reality, though? Of course it was a big step to say, I'm for that, but what if the President --
MS. PERINO: The President worked with -- well, look at the two leaders that the President is working with now. He helped President Sharon -- Prime Minister Sharon come along to this point. Now he has President Abbas who is willing to work with him. And the President did not try to broker this for them. He worked to help them get to this point together.
There have been some setbacks. Remember, August of 2006, Lebanon was in the middle of a war. And this caused great consternation between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and got them -- conceivably could have gotten them off track. But look at the measure of these two leaders, who are able to come back together, a year later, and say we are able to launch negotiations because we believe that we can get to a Palestinian state that would be better for both of our people.
Q But what about the fact of 2001 -- I mean, The New York Times this morning reports about the first National Security Council meeting the President ever had, he said that he didn't think a U.S. President should have such an active role, that it backfired on Bill Clinton to be so actively involved in the Mideast peace process. What's changed now that he's so actively involved --
MS. PERINO: I think we have a completely different circumstance now. You no longer have President Arafat, who the President labeled a terrorist. You don't have him in the way anymore. You have a leader in President Abbas who has denounced terror and violence --
Q You don't have --
MS. PERINO: Helen, can you please let me finish? You have a leader in President Abbas who has said that violence is not the way to get there, and that a Palestinian state is going to have to be one that is free from terror and violence. And he has denounced Hamas. Then you have, in Prime Minister Olmert, an Israeli who has said, we can see our way to getting through the road map and we believe that a Palestinian state is the way for us to have peace and security in our country, as well. And he's one of the first, after Sharon, to have said that and taken an active role.
So you have a very different circumstance right now. Remember, this is a decades-old conflict, and it is going to be difficult. The President believes this is an opportunity to try it. And again, he believes that history is full of missed opportunities because people only looked at the downside. But he thinks that we have got it to a point now where they have a chance of success.
Sheryl.
Q Dana, back to the meeting with Al Gore. I wonder just about the President's reasoning for inviting the former Vice President. Does he want to hear from the former Vice President about global warming, or does he view this as an opportunity maybe to make amends, or to reconcile the past? What is his thinking about what --
MS. PERINO: I didn't ask the President his psycho -- I didn't psychoanalyze the President to find out why he decided to invite Al Gore to the White House. There is an annual event in which the President invites the Nobel Prize winners -- American Nobel Prize winners to the White House. Al Gore happens to be one of those recipients this year. And I believe it was a presidential, gentlemanly and a friendly thing to do to invite Al Gore to the White House. They have a private meeting, and I'm not going to intrude on that. Obviously, President Gore -- Vice President Gore will bring up anything that he wants to bring up. But just remember --
Q But I'm asking, what does the President want to hear from -- does he want to know -- talk to him one on one?
MS. PERINO: I don't know. Sheryl, I did not psychoanalyze the President --
Q It's not psychoanalyzing --
MS. PERINO: Yes, it is. It is. It's a friendly and neighborly thing to do to invite someone to come to the White House. It's not something that was calculated. I guess that's my point. The President didn't make a calculated decision to invite Al Gore to the White House. The President was inviting him because he was part of the award winners, and because he does want to talk with him. Again, as I say, we have a great tradition in this country of political rivals being able to put the past behind them and to work together for the benefit of the American people.
Mark.
Q Yes, Dana, what's the status of the statement that the Israelis and Palestinians are hoping to try and issue tomorrow and have had such a devil of a time trying to --
MS. PERINO: As I understand it, they continue to talk about it and to try to work towards it. But as Steve Hadley said to you yesterday, that the document is -- would be a nice thing to have, but it's not critical to this meeting, that they can launch the negotiations without a document. So if they get one it would be a good thing, but it's not critical.
Q Are they going to -- how are we going to know it's all over? And are you going to brief there?
MS. PERINO: There's a full schedule that we can provide to you. But the President and President --
Q In Annapolis?
MS. PERINO: Yes, in Annapolis. President Bush, President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert will each give speeches. And then the President will return to the White House. There will be a briefing tomorrow -- we're trying to figure out the timing of that because it could be a little bit later again, just given the circumstances. But you will certainly get information. And then we'll see if there's anything else to provide for you on Wednesday.
Q Tomorrow's speech, can you give us a sense of what the President is going to be saying tomorrow? The main theme -- well, we probably know what the main theme is, but what --
MS. PERINO: You have the main theme, given what I've said to you today, but there will a little bit more detail --
Q He's going to push, prod, beg, plead --
MS. PERINO: I think, encourage. I would describe it as encourage. And hopefully later today we'll be able to provide you a little bit more on the speech. It's being finalized now.
Go ahead, Jim.
Q Mortgages: The administration policy towards this financial crisis -- if you agree it's a crisis -- seems to be very reactive. We'll have a negative headline, and the President will appear in the Rose Garden, or Secretary Paulson will give an interview to the Wall Street Journal. But there doesn't seem to be a proactive policy. I mean, nothing is happening on the Senate side of the Hill and --
MS. PERINO: Jim, Jim --
Q What do you guys --
MS. PERINO: I know you don't come around very often, missed a few things. The President, back on August 31st, had a large announcement regarding the issue. We do see it as a very significant problem. That is why we --
Q I was here August 31st --
MS. PERINO: -- and we are implementing our side of what we can do through the executive branch. The fact that the Senate hasn't moved is not the President's fault. This is -- that is a congressional matter, and I would refer you to them.
Q It seems like this is -- as I said, it's reactive.
MS. PERINO: That's not -- Jim, in addition to that, Secretary Paulson and Secretary Jackson also created the Hope Now program, which worked with the private sector in order to help people who were at risk of losing their homes. In addition to that, we were able to get the FHA to be able to do risk-based pricing so that more people could get insurance for those homes. What we would like to see is Congress take the additional step of moving forward on the legislation. And we hope that when they get back on December 3rd that they will begin that process.
Q One of the heads of the Financial Committee is out campaigning for President. I mean, has the President --
MS. PERINO: Again, that is a congressional matter, Jim, and if you want to place blame of inaction --
Q I don't want to place blame. I'm just wondering --
MS. PERINO: -- it's not here. It's at the Congress, and they're going to have make those decisions and they'll have to answer to the American people if they don't act.
Q I'm not trying to place blame, I'm just --
MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on.
Olivier.
Q Dana, any talk in today's meetings about a possible presidential trip to Israel or the Palestinian Territories? What conditions --
MS. PERINO: They did not talk about any future travel.
Q Does the President want to go before he leaves office? And are there any conditions that need to be met before he goes?
MS. PERINO: Again, they didn't talk about travel. Obviously, the President enjoyed his trip very much to the region when he went as governor. He has not been as President. I am sure it is something that the President, if he could fit it into the -- into the next year's activities, would consider it. But they didn't talk about it today, and before -- I won't pre-announce that.
Q Is it tied at all to progress on the peace process?
MS. PERINO: All I can tell is that there was no talk of travel today.
Wendell.
Q Were you hinting that you might release excerpts of something of the speech later today?
MS. PERINO: I would try to do that. I'll see if I can do that. Look, it's being finalized now, and some of these speeches, especially ones that are dealing with matters that are very sensitive and which people have a lot of interest and vested interest, it takes a little while to get things finalized. I would try to get some excerpts out today if I can, but I can't promise.
John.
Q One of the Vice President's former advisors said that -- said last week that this trip, or this attempt to broker a peace process, is a distraction from vital U.S. interests. He said that things like Iran, North Korea are more central to U.S. interests. Does the President disagree with that view?
MS. PERINO: I think the President sees this in terms of, if you step back and look at it in terms of a larger vision, the President believes that trying to establish a Palestinian state, with two states living side by side in peace and security, is good for the entire region, and hopefully will lead to a more comprehensive peace in the Middle East; that moderate forces are coming together.
North Korea is an issue that is also on the President's table, and we have Ambassador Chris Hill, who is actively working that through Secretary Rice. There should be more of a -- more information coming out regarding that. In terms of the time line, I believe it's December 31st that we have to have additional movement there.
And in Iraq, we have the President, just this morning, signing the Declaration of Principles with Iraq. So there's -- we can talk and chew gum at the same time.
Go ahead, John.
Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions about Pakistan, if I may.
MS. PERINO: Okay.
Q You said two weeks ago that the administration was in touch with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto about things. Are they also in touch with former Prime Minister Sharif, who arrived there yesterday?
MS. PERINO: John, I don't know. I'd have to check.
Q All right. The other thing I wanted to know, speaking of Benazir Bhutto, her niece, the poet, Fatima Bhutto, wrote a lengthy article in The Los Angeles Times last week, warning the United States about involvement with her aunt, and reminding us of the corruption charges and that she might have been complicit in the murder of her own father, Prime Minister Bhutto's brother. Are you aware of that, and do you have a reaction?
MS. PERINO: I didn't -- I missed that article in The Los Angeles Times, and so, I'll have to pass.
Q So you're not aware of anything Fatima Bhutto said?
MS. PERINO: No, I don't know her.
Go ahead, Les.
MS. PERINO: Yes, thank you, Dana. Two questions. The Washington-Annapolis-Washington meeting has been called a quote, "peace conference." My question: How does the President believe it can be a real peace conference when the Saudi Foreign Minister has announced that Saudis will not even shake hands with the Israelis?
MS. PERINO: The President is pleased that so many countries are coming to the conference, including the Arab nations. And this is a step forward, so we'll take it from there.
Q Saudi Arabia has just sentenced a 20-year-old female victim of gang rape by seven men to 200 lashes because she was in a car with a man not her husband, brother, or father. And my question: Since this sentence has been strongly denounced by Democrat candidates, Clinton, Obama, Biden and Edwards, surely the President does not expect you, as a lady, to have no comment on this Saudi atrocity, does he?
MS. PERINO: I don't think it matters if you're a female or a male. I think that the situation is very discouraging and outrageous. There is an appeals process and we hope that the verdict changes. It is certainly not consistent with the judicial reforms that the Saudis have said that they would undertake.
Victoria.
Q Stephen Hadley said yesterday that President Bush would not propose his own ideas, with regard to the conference. Does President Bush have specific, concrete ideas for how to bring about the two-state solution?
MS. PERINO: Well, yes, and he announced those in 2002, when he announced the road map. And so we'll have the negotiations, and the road map is part of this discussion, and you have to have pieces of it implemented in order to get to a permanent solution.
Q Well, if he has specific ideas, why is he not now putting them forward, and why would Stephen Hadley say something like that?
MS. PERINO: I think -- what I believe what Steve Hadley meant -- and I've been talking with him, and I've been in the meetings -- is that the President is not going to try to solve this problem for them. This is for the Israelis and Palestinians to solve. The President laid out the road map of which people around the world, including the Israelis and Palestinians and the United States, plus the Quartet, have all bought into. And those are the specifics that we look to when we think of what the President's involvement is.
Q So we think that his diplomacy would not help?
MS. PERINO: Victoria, he just had two meetings -- one bilateral meeting this morning at 11:00 a.m. and another one at 1:00 p.m. He has a trilateral meeting tomorrow. He's giving a toast at the State Department tonight. The President is actively involved, as this past 48 hours has shown, and the next 24 will show. And the President said that he will continue to be committed, and that Secretary Rice will be in the region and she speaks for him when she is out there.
Paula.
Q I have a question on executive action. This is specific to the Office of Government Ethics, and specifically, there's a few provisions in here dealing with the disclosure of classified information to unauthorized persons, as well as making false statements about any knowledge of that. I'd like to know, since the President has authorized -- and only the President is authorized to allow the disclosure of this information to unauthorized persons -- why, when he became aware that this happened, did he not remove from office any members of the executive branch that either disclosed this information, or had knowledge that it happened?
MS. PERINO: Paula, we have gone through this so many times, I'm just -- I don't have anything to add to the public record.
Q Well, I just have to ask about the timing, because prior to the criminal investigation by Patrick Fitzgerald, the President said that anyone that was involved in the disclosure of the identity of Valerie Plame would not longer work for the White House. And it was only after that criminal investigation began that he changed the ground rules to anybody that commits a crime will no longer work for the White House.
MS. PERINO: Paula, the person who revealed her name has said so publicly, and that person did not work at the White House.
Q But there was also the person that told Scott McClellan that he was not involved. And he was.
MS. PERINO: Thank you.
END 3:13 P.M. EST
Press Briefing by Dana Perino
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
2:46 P.M. EST
MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Sorry to be a little bit later today, but it was for good reason. I have a couple of statements by the President -- these are in his words -- one on Russia, and one on Senator Lott. And then I'll have a little bit of information for you about the meetings he's had today.
The first is a statement about Russia. The President's words: I am deeply concerned about the detention of numerous human rights activists and political leaders who participated in peaceful rallies this weekend. I am particularly troubled by the use of force by law enforcement authorities to stop these peaceful activities and to prevent some journalists and human rights activists from covering them.
The freedoms of expression, assembly and press, as well as due process are fundamental to any democratic society. I am hopeful that the government of Russia will honor its international obligations in these areas, investigate allegations of abuses and free those who remain in detention.
Now, secondly, on Senator Lott: For more than three decades Trent Lott has been an outstanding advocate in the United States Congress for both the people of Mississippi and every United States citizen. With service in the Republican leadership in both the House of Representatives and the Senate he has skillfully advanced legislation and effectively championed key principles of our party, including low taxes and a strong national defense.
Trent has worked to enhance the economic vitality of our nation and his home state throughout his career. By focusing on the important defense, transportation, infrastructure, agriculture and educational needs of Mississippi, he has helped bring new development and opportunity to his constituents. Throughout his service Trent has always been a leader, someone his colleagues have known they could count on to stay true to his principles while working cooperatively to achieve results for the American people. Trent enjoyed bipartisan respect because of his reverence for the institutions of Congress, and because Republicans and Democrats knew they could count on him to keep his commitments and his word. His immense talents will be missed in our Nation's Capital. Laura and I wish him and his wife Tricia all the best.
Stepping back into my own voice, the President today had good meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Abbas today. Representatives of more than 40 countries are gathering here tonight at the State Department and tomorrow in Annapolis to demonstrate the international resolve to seize this important opportunity to advance freedom and peace in the Middle East.
This conference will show the international support that exists for the Israelis' and the Palestinians' goal to start negotiations on the establishment of a Palestinian state and the realization of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It will also provide an opportunity for the Israelis, the Palestinians and their neighbors to recommit to implementing the road map. And the conference will review Palestinian plans to build the institutions of a democratic state, and their preparations for next month's Donor Conference in Paris on the 17th.
The President is personally committed to implementing his vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, and looks forward to speaking tonight -- he will give a toast at the dinner -- and tomorrow in Annapolis.
Q Can you tell us what he's doing in these meetings? Is he giving a pep talk to these leaders? Is he asking them to make concessions? Could you give more description?
MS. PERINO: The President, in these meetings, is encouraging the two leaders. First and foremost, he is saying that he is proud of them, for them to get to this moment. These are two leaders who have the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security as their intention. This is the first time that we have had this, and that's why the President is encouraging them in these meetings to seize this opportunity.
One of the things that the President said in the meetings is that history is full of missed opportunities, because people would focus only on the downside. And he is encouraging them to work together, to use this as a launching pad for the negotiations that the two leaders have said that they want to conclude before the end of the President's term.
Q Was that the President who said history is full of --
MS. PERINO: That is exactly what he said. He said, "History is full of missed opportunities, because people just looked to the downside." And he encouraged them to seize the moment.
Q When you remarked on the President's deep concern for what's happening in Russia, and you cited some reasons why -- but the President, when referring to Pakistan, said that Musharraf had not crossed a line, even though many of the same kind of events -- jailing political activists, the media --
MS. PERINO: Remember, though, that was on the day -- that the President said that -- that was on the day that President Musharraf had just released 3,100 people who had been detained. And the President was referring to him working to get back on the path to a democracy. And so we had called for all of those who had been detained in Pakistan to be released immediately, as well, and for people to be allowed to gather, for the press freedoms to be returned. And in this regard, in terms of Russia, again, this is a country that the President believes will only be strengthened if more people have a say in the political process, if they hear more voices. And that's why he issued the statement today.
Q Can you describe for us what is happening with former Vice President Albert Gore being here with the President? Can you give us a little picture inside of the Oval?
MS. PERINO: I just left the meeting with President Abbas, and I did not have a chance to see Vice President Gore. But that meeting is, I think, underway as we speak, in the Oval Office.
Q You might want to go check in on it and come back and tell us about it. We'll wait.
MS. PERINO: I think the President has seen plenty enough of me today. The President and the Vice President are having a private meeting today. The President invited him to come and spend a little bit of time with him in the Oval Office prior to the event that he's having in the Oval Office, in order to give thanks to the Noble Prize recipients who have represented America so well, of which Al Gore is a part.
Q The former Vice President has been deeply critical of this President's conduct in several areas. Do you think they're still upset with one another? Is there still bad blood here?
MS. PERINO: I don't believe so. I know this President does not harbor any resentments. He never has. He's -- he was the one who picked up the phone to call Vice President Gore to make sure that he could make it to the event. He invited him to come and have a meeting with him prior to the Nobel Prize event, and I think he was very much looking forward to having the meeting.
It's remarkable that in our system of government we have this tradition where political rivals can put that behind them and get together and have a good conversation, and -- also the good of, in this case, Al Gore's focusing on climate change. The President has had a full seven years, with one more year to go, and I think that they'll probably have a good meeting.
Q In your statement, you said something the two had hoped for some sort of conclusion?
MS. PERINO: President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert have both said that they would like to conclude this round of negotiations before the President leaves office.
Q Conclude it with what?
MS. PERINO: With getting to a permanent agreement for two states living side by side in peace and security.
Q Before the President leaves office?
MS. PERINO: That's what they've said.
Q So that's their timetable now?
MS. PERINO: That is what they've said.
Q Would you expect them to commit to that after tomorrow's conference?
MS. PERINO: I don't know what they all say tomorrow. I haven't seen their speeches, but they have said it publicly before, so I don't know why they would not say it -- and they both said it again in these meetings today, so I don't see why that would be any different tomorrow.
Q -- conclude an agreement by the end of the --
Q I'm sorry, they didn't say it to us. They said it to the President, though?
MS. PERINO: Yes. They said it in those meetings.
Q Does that mean actual creation of a Palestinian state by then, or just --
MS. PERINO: I think it's the negotiations in order to get to that point. And implementation of the road map, of course, has to be a part of this. This is -- it's going to be difficult, it's going to take some time, and I think we all have to be realistic about that. But this -- the President believes that the opportunity is right in order to seize this time, because you have two leaders who are willing to recognize that a Palestinian state is important not just for the Palestinians, but also for Israeli security. We have in President Abbas a person who wants to stop the violence, and doesn't believe that terror is a way to get to Palestinian security, and the type of life that they want to have and that they deserve. And so tomorrow
-- we'll have those speeches tomorrow, and then we'll hopefully have more for you later in the afternoon tomorrow.
Q On Russia, does the President, having embraced Putin so early in his administration, does he feel that he misjudged Putin? Is he disappointed?
MS. PERINO: This is a question that the President has gotten over and over again over the past several months. Here's the President's point: He believes that the best opportunity for Russia is to have a democracy. And there had been some movement towards democracy in many different areas, including in the press and certainly in the economy. But there have been steps backwards, as well.
Democracies aren't developed overnight. We know that from our own history. The President has a good relationship with Putin and he treats him with respect, and that is the best in order to work with them. Remember, we are working with Russia cooperatively on many different issues, including Iran, and Russia is part of the Quartet that is working towards Middle East peace. So we have a relationship with them. We have, and continue to be in communication and dialogue with them. And of course our embassy officials had been in contact with the Russian government there in Moscow.
Q And he doesn't feel that he misjudged him? I mean, after the seeming embrace of Ahmadinejad and all these anti-democratic measures, he doesn't feel that perhaps he judged Putin too early?
MS. PERINO: No, the President believes that what he saw in Putin is what is there. What is difficult when you're trying to establish democracies and freedoms across the world is that it just takes time, and it's difficult, and their history is not one of democracy and freedom and liberty. A middle class had grown up within Russia, and within Pakistan, and you have people who want to have a voice and to participate in the political process. And because of that, there sometimes might be uncomfortable government officials who are dealing with that and reacting in the wrong way.
Our obligation, as people who have the benefit of living in freedom and peace and liberty, is to help get them back on that path to a stronger democracy. The President believes the best way for Russia to prosper in the future is to have its people -- for the people that live in Russia, the opportunity to participate in the political process, to be able to have freedom of movement, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly -- and all of those things are just going to take some time.
Q Did Olmert and Abbas discuss specific steps, with the President, that they were prepared to offer as a sign of good faith, such as freezing settlements, those types of things?
MS. PERINO: These meetings were much more general, talking about the launch of the negotiations. Remember, Secretary Rice has been in the region eight or nine times this year alone, and those details are usually talked about in her meetings and, of course, David Welch, along with his counterparts, in the region. And so these meetings were a little bit more general in talking about the goal of this meeting, which is to start the negotiations, to launch the negotiations. And the President asked them to focus on the day after Annapolis, not just Annapolis, but where do they go the day after.
Q How does the President believe that peace can be reached without including Hamas in this equation?
MS. PERINO: The President believes -- there will only be one Palestinian state. And it is going to be difficult work, and it's going to take some time for the Palestinians to work through the situation with Hamas right now. They are under obligation to do that, and will have to -- will have to work with this international community.
Remember, one thing that is different about the conference tomorrow is that you have over 40 countries here, and you have Arab participation. And this is not so that the world can meddle in the negotiations, but so that they can support the negotiations. This agreement is going to be between the Israelis and the Palestinians. And at the end of that agreement, when they reach what they can agree on, then the world should support them. That is what the President talked about with them a lot, as well, which is that you have this opportunity, where you have international interests and support, as well as a Donors Conference that is coming up, and to have everyone at the table is an opportunity to get everything out, so that everyone can start working towards these negotiations that will take place over the next year.
Q But, Dana, when you talk about seizing an opportunity, why did it take the President almost seven years to take on a more active role in this process?
MS. PERINO: Ed, I think that anyone who -- I have seen the storyline over the past week as we've led up to this conference, and I think that, first and foremost, I would ask you just to take a step back and look at what the President has done. He was the first President to call for a Palestinian state. That was a big step. And the Palestinians recognize that, Israel recognized that; the world woke up to the fact that this President was the one that said --
Q He didn't --
MS. PERINO: -- in order to have a peace in the region, you had to have a Palestinian state.
Q Well, what if he did actually make that a reality, though? Of course it was a big step to say, I'm for that, but what if the President --
MS. PERINO: The President worked with -- well, look at the two leaders that the President is working with now. He helped President Sharon -- Prime Minister Sharon come along to this point. Now he has President Abbas who is willing to work with him. And the President did not try to broker this for them. He worked to help them get to this point together.
There have been some setbacks. Remember, August of 2006, Lebanon was in the middle of a war. And this caused great consternation between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and got them -- conceivably could have gotten them off track. But look at the measure of these two leaders, who are able to come back together, a year later, and say we are able to launch negotiations because we believe that we can get to a Palestinian state that would be better for both of our people.
Q But what about the fact of 2001 -- I mean, The New York Times this morning reports about the first National Security Council meeting the President ever had, he said that he didn't think a U.S. President should have such an active role, that it backfired on Bill Clinton to be so actively involved in the Mideast peace process. What's changed now that he's so actively involved --
MS. PERINO: I think we have a completely different circumstance now. You no longer have President Arafat, who the President labeled a terrorist. You don't have him in the way anymore. You have a leader in President Abbas who has denounced terror and violence --
Q You don't have --
MS. PERINO: Helen, can you please let me finish? You have a leader in President Abbas who has said that violence is not the way to get there, and that a Palestinian state is going to have to be one that is free from terror and violence. And he has denounced Hamas. Then you have, in Prime Minister Olmert, an Israeli who has said, we can see our way to getting through the road map and we believe that a Palestinian state is the way for us to have peace and security in our country, as well. And he's one of the first, after Sharon, to have said that and taken an active role.
So you have a very different circumstance right now. Remember, this is a decades-old conflict, and it is going to be difficult. The President believes this is an opportunity to try it. And again, he believes that history is full of missed opportunities because people only looked at the downside. But he thinks that we have got it to a point now where they have a chance of success.
Sheryl.
Q Dana, back to the meeting with Al Gore. I wonder just about the President's reasoning for inviting the former Vice President. Does he want to hear from the former Vice President about global warming, or does he view this as an opportunity maybe to make amends, or to reconcile the past? What is his thinking about what --
MS. PERINO: I didn't ask the President his psycho -- I didn't psychoanalyze the President to find out why he decided to invite Al Gore to the White House. There is an annual event in which the President invites the Nobel Prize winners -- American Nobel Prize winners to the White House. Al Gore happens to be one of those recipients this year. And I believe it was a presidential, gentlemanly and a friendly thing to do to invite Al Gore to the White House. They have a private meeting, and I'm not going to intrude on that. Obviously, President Gore -- Vice President Gore will bring up anything that he wants to bring up. But just remember --
Q But I'm asking, what does the President want to hear from -- does he want to know -- talk to him one on one?
MS. PERINO: I don't know. Sheryl, I did not psychoanalyze the President --
Q It's not psychoanalyzing --
MS. PERINO: Yes, it is. It is. It's a friendly and neighborly thing to do to invite someone to come to the White House. It's not something that was calculated. I guess that's my point. The President didn't make a calculated decision to invite Al Gore to the White House. The President was inviting him because he was part of the award winners, and because he does want to talk with him. Again, as I say, we have a great tradition in this country of political rivals being able to put the past behind them and to work together for the benefit of the American people.
Mark.
Q Yes, Dana, what's the status of the statement that the Israelis and Palestinians are hoping to try and issue tomorrow and have had such a devil of a time trying to --
MS. PERINO: As I understand it, they continue to talk about it and to try to work towards it. But as Steve Hadley said to you yesterday, that the document is -- would be a nice thing to have, but it's not critical to this meeting, that they can launch the negotiations without a document. So if they get one it would be a good thing, but it's not critical.
Q Are they going to -- how are we going to know it's all over? And are you going to brief there?
MS. PERINO: There's a full schedule that we can provide to you. But the President and President --
Q In Annapolis?
MS. PERINO: Yes, in Annapolis. President Bush, President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert will each give speeches. And then the President will return to the White House. There will be a briefing tomorrow -- we're trying to figure out the timing of that because it could be a little bit later again, just given the circumstances. But you will certainly get information. And then we'll see if there's anything else to provide for you on Wednesday.
Q Tomorrow's speech, can you give us a sense of what the President is going to be saying tomorrow? The main theme -- well, we probably know what the main theme is, but what --
MS. PERINO: You have the main theme, given what I've said to you today, but there will a little bit more detail --
Q He's going to push, prod, beg, plead --
MS. PERINO: I think, encourage. I would describe it as encourage. And hopefully later today we'll be able to provide you a little bit more on the speech. It's being finalized now.
Go ahead, Jim.
Q Mortgages: The administration policy towards this financial crisis -- if you agree it's a crisis -- seems to be very reactive. We'll have a negative headline, and the President will appear in the Rose Garden, or Secretary Paulson will give an interview to the Wall Street Journal. But there doesn't seem to be a proactive policy. I mean, nothing is happening on the Senate side of the Hill and --
MS. PERINO: Jim, Jim --
Q What do you guys --
MS. PERINO: I know you don't come around very often, missed a few things. The President, back on August 31st, had a large announcement regarding the issue. We do see it as a very significant problem. That is why we --
Q I was here August 31st --
MS. PERINO: -- and we are implementing our side of what we can do through the executive branch. The fact that the Senate hasn't moved is not the President's fault. This is -- that is a congressional matter, and I would refer you to them.
Q It seems like this is -- as I said, it's reactive.
MS. PERINO: That's not -- Jim, in addition to that, Secretary Paulson and Secretary Jackson also created the Hope Now program, which worked with the private sector in order to help people who were at risk of losing their homes. In addition to that, we were able to get the FHA to be able to do risk-based pricing so that more people could get insurance for those homes. What we would like to see is Congress take the additional step of moving forward on the legislation. And we hope that when they get back on December 3rd that they will begin that process.
Q One of the heads of the Financial Committee is out campaigning for President. I mean, has the President --
MS. PERINO: Again, that is a congressional matter, Jim, and if you want to place blame of inaction --
Q I don't want to place blame. I'm just wondering --
MS. PERINO: -- it's not here. It's at the Congress, and they're going to have make those decisions and they'll have to answer to the American people if they don't act.
Q I'm not trying to place blame, I'm just --
MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on.
Olivier.
Q Dana, any talk in today's meetings about a possible presidential trip to Israel or the Palestinian Territories? What conditions --
MS. PERINO: They did not talk about any future travel.
Q Does the President want to go before he leaves office? And are there any conditions that need to be met before he goes?
MS. PERINO: Again, they didn't talk about travel. Obviously, the President enjoyed his trip very much to the region when he went as governor. He has not been as President. I am sure it is something that the President, if he could fit it into the -- into the next year's activities, would consider it. But they didn't talk about it today, and before -- I won't pre-announce that.
Q Is it tied at all to progress on the peace process?
MS. PERINO: All I can tell is that there was no talk of travel today.
Wendell.
Q Were you hinting that you might release excerpts of something of the speech later today?
MS. PERINO: I would try to do that. I'll see if I can do that. Look, it's being finalized now, and some of these speeches, especially ones that are dealing with matters that are very sensitive and which people have a lot of interest and vested interest, it takes a little while to get things finalized. I would try to get some excerpts out today if I can, but I can't promise.
John.
Q One of the Vice President's former advisors said that -- said last week that this trip, or this attempt to broker a peace process, is a distraction from vital U.S. interests. He said that things like Iran, North Korea are more central to U.S. interests. Does the President disagree with that view?
MS. PERINO: I think the President sees this in terms of, if you step back and look at it in terms of a larger vision, the President believes that trying to establish a Palestinian state, with two states living side by side in peace and security, is good for the entire region, and hopefully will lead to a more comprehensive peace in the Middle East; that moderate forces are coming together.
North Korea is an issue that is also on the President's table, and we have Ambassador Chris Hill, who is actively working that through Secretary Rice. There should be more of a -- more information coming out regarding that. In terms of the time line, I believe it's December 31st that we have to have additional movement there.
And in Iraq, we have the President, just this morning, signing the Declaration of Principles with Iraq. So there's -- we can talk and chew gum at the same time.
Go ahead, John.
Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions about Pakistan, if I may.
MS. PERINO: Okay.
Q You said two weeks ago that the administration was in touch with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto about things. Are they also in touch with former Prime Minister Sharif, who arrived there yesterday?
MS. PERINO: John, I don't know. I'd have to check.
Q All right. The other thing I wanted to know, speaking of Benazir Bhutto, her niece, the poet, Fatima Bhutto, wrote a lengthy article in The Los Angeles Times last week, warning the United States about involvement with her aunt, and reminding us of the corruption charges and that she might have been complicit in the murder of her own father, Prime Minister Bhutto's brother. Are you aware of that, and do you have a reaction?
MS. PERINO: I didn't -- I missed that article in The Los Angeles Times, and so, I'll have to pass.
Q So you're not aware of anything Fatima Bhutto said?
MS. PERINO: No, I don't know her.
Go ahead, Les.
MS. PERINO: Yes, thank you, Dana. Two questions. The Washington-Annapolis-Washington meeting has been called a quote, "peace conference." My question: How does the President believe it can be a real peace conference when the Saudi Foreign Minister has announced that Saudis will not even shake hands with the Israelis?
MS. PERINO: The President is pleased that so many countries are coming to the conference, including the Arab nations. And this is a step forward, so we'll take it from there.
Q Saudi Arabia has just sentenced a 20-year-old female victim of gang rape by seven men to 200 lashes because she was in a car with a man not her husband, brother, or father. And my question: Since this sentence has been strongly denounced by Democrat candidates, Clinton, Obama, Biden and Edwards, surely the President does not expect you, as a lady, to have no comment on this Saudi atrocity, does he?
MS. PERINO: I don't think it matters if you're a female or a male. I think that the situation is very discouraging and outrageous. There is an appeals process and we hope that the verdict changes. It is certainly not consistent with the judicial reforms that the Saudis have said that they would undertake.
Victoria.
Q Stephen Hadley said yesterday that President Bush would not propose his own ideas, with regard to the conference. Does President Bush have specific, concrete ideas for how to bring about the two-state solution?
MS. PERINO: Well, yes, and he announced those in 2002, when he announced the road map. And so we'll have the negotiations, and the road map is part of this discussion, and you have to have pieces of it implemented in order to get to a permanent solution.
Q Well, if he has specific ideas, why is he not now putting them forward, and why would Stephen Hadley say something like that?
MS. PERINO: I think -- what I believe what Steve Hadley meant -- and I've been talking with him, and I've been in the meetings -- is that the President is not going to try to solve this problem for them. This is for the Israelis and Palestinians to solve. The President laid out the road map of which people around the world, including the Israelis and Palestinians and the United States, plus the Quartet, have all bought into. And those are the specifics that we look to when we think of what the President's involvement is.
Q So we think that his diplomacy would not help?
MS. PERINO: Victoria, he just had two meetings -- one bilateral meeting this morning at 11:00 a.m. and another one at 1:00 p.m. He has a trilateral meeting tomorrow. He's giving a toast at the State Department tonight. The President is actively involved, as this past 48 hours has shown, and the next 24 will show. And the President said that he will continue to be committed, and that Secretary Rice will be in the region and she speaks for him when she is out there.
Paula.
Q I have a question on executive action. This is specific to the Office of Government Ethics, and specifically, there's a few provisions in here dealing with the disclosure of classified information to unauthorized persons, as well as making false statements about any knowledge of that. I'd like to know, since the President has authorized -- and only the President is authorized to allow the disclosure of this information to unauthorized persons -- why, when he became aware that this happened, did he not remove from office any members of the executive branch that either disclosed this information, or had knowledge that it happened?
MS. PERINO: Paula, we have gone through this so many times, I'm just -- I don't have anything to add to the public record.
Q Well, I just have to ask about the timing, because prior to the criminal investigation by Patrick Fitzgerald, the President said that anyone that was involved in the disclosure of the identity of Valerie Plame would not longer work for the White House. And it was only after that criminal investigation began that he changed the ground rules to anybody that commits a crime will no longer work for the White House.
MS. PERINO: Paula, the person who revealed her name has said so publicly, and that person did not work at the White House.
Q But there was also the person that told Scott McClellan that he was not involved. And he was.
MS. PERINO: Thank you.
END 3:13 P.M. EST
Oprah Winfrey & Barack Obama Scheduled To Tour Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire
I just got this email press release from the Obama campaign on Oprah Winfrey's scheduled tours with Senator Barack Obama.
CHICAGO, IL - The Obama for America campaign today announced that Oprah Winfrey will join Barack Obama for a tour through three early voting states on December 8th and 9th. Winfrey and Obama will hold two events in Iowa, one in South Carolina, and one in New Hampshire. All events will be free and open to the public.
TOUR SCHEDULE:
SATURDAY DECEMBER 8TH
DES MOINES, IA
CEDAR RAPIDS, IA
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 9TH
COLUMBIA, SC
MANCHESTER, NH
Locations and times for the events will be announced in the coming days. Those interested in attending can sign up online today to ensure that they receive the event details when they are announced.
Links below:
http://iowa.barackobama.com/oprah_dm
http://iowa.barackobama.com/oprah_cr
http://sc.barackobama.com/oprah_sc
http://nh.barackobama.com/oprah_nh
Sunday, November 25, 2007
CNN / YouTube Debate - Nursing Homes & Private Equity Firms
There's a disturbing trend in the nursing home industry today, and forms the basis for my CNN / YouTube debate question submitted at 10:45 PM PST, 11-25-07, just under the deadline!
The question is are you as a presidential candidate concerned that private equity firms are buying nursing homes, laying off staff, and pocketing the difference, resulting in poor service? If you are concerned, what will you do about it?
JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - Strong Earthquakes Hit Indonesia
Strong Earthquakes Hit Indonesia
By NINIEK KARMINI, Associated Press Writer
Sunday, November 25, 2007
(11-25) 09:52 PST JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) --
Strong earthquakes shook western and eastern Indonesia on Sunday, sending panicked residents fleeing from their homes. There were no immediate reports of injuries.
A 6.1-magnitude quake early Sunday was centered 110 miles from Bengkulu, a coastal town on Sumatra island that has been hit by a series of tremors in recent months, the U.S. Geological Survey said.
It was followed 13 hours later by a quake with a preliminary strength of 6.7 on Sumbawa island, to the west, the agency said.
The morning temblor near Sumatra had a depth of just six miles beneath the ocean floor, the USGS said, but did not trigger a tsunami.
"It was very strong ... even utility poles were shaking," said Dina Ramadani, a resident in Bengkulu, adding that people started screaming after one pole toppled over and crashed into a street.
The later quake on Sumbawa struck 27 miles from the town of Raba at a depth of 18 miles, the USGS reported. The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center said there was a "very small possibility of a local tsunami," but none materialized.
Local officials said there were no reports of damage.
Indonesia, the world's largest archipelago, is prone to seismic upheavals due to its location on the so-called Pacific "Ring of Fire," an arc of volcanos and fault lines encircling the Pacific Basin.
In December 2004, a massive earthquake struck off Sumatra and triggered a tsunami that killed more than 230,000 people in a dozen countries, including 160,000 people in Indonesia's westernmost province of Aceh.
Two months ago, an 8.4-magnitude quake off Bengkulu that was followed by two tremors measuring 7.8 and 7.1 killed 23 people and destroyed thousands of buildings. The region has since been hit by hundreds of aftershocks.
By NINIEK KARMINI, Associated Press Writer
Sunday, November 25, 2007
(11-25) 09:52 PST JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) --
Strong earthquakes shook western and eastern Indonesia on Sunday, sending panicked residents fleeing from their homes. There were no immediate reports of injuries.
A 6.1-magnitude quake early Sunday was centered 110 miles from Bengkulu, a coastal town on Sumatra island that has been hit by a series of tremors in recent months, the U.S. Geological Survey said.
It was followed 13 hours later by a quake with a preliminary strength of 6.7 on Sumbawa island, to the west, the agency said.
The morning temblor near Sumatra had a depth of just six miles beneath the ocean floor, the USGS said, but did not trigger a tsunami.
"It was very strong ... even utility poles were shaking," said Dina Ramadani, a resident in Bengkulu, adding that people started screaming after one pole toppled over and crashed into a street.
The later quake on Sumbawa struck 27 miles from the town of Raba at a depth of 18 miles, the USGS reported. The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center said there was a "very small possibility of a local tsunami," but none materialized.
Local officials said there were no reports of damage.
Indonesia, the world's largest archipelago, is prone to seismic upheavals due to its location on the so-called Pacific "Ring of Fire," an arc of volcanos and fault lines encircling the Pacific Basin.
In December 2004, a massive earthquake struck off Sumatra and triggered a tsunami that killed more than 230,000 people in a dozen countries, including 160,000 people in Indonesia's westernmost province of Aceh.
Two months ago, an 8.4-magnitude quake off Bengkulu that was followed by two tremors measuring 7.8 and 7.1 killed 23 people and destroyed thousands of buildings. The region has since been hit by hundreds of aftershocks.
YouTube's Up - But That Crash Was Huge
At 10:14 AM, YouTube came back up, but why it went down , I don't know. That was weird and unprecendented. Just goes to show you it's good to have videos on more than one system, or else.
But it's good that YouTube's back up -- having it down for a whole day would have been a disaster for millions of people.
It's gotten that large!
But it's good that YouTube's back up -- having it down for a whole day would have been a disaster for millions of people.
It's gotten that large!
YouTube - What's The Deal With "Sorry About That, I Broke YouTube?"
And on top of all of the YouTube outages, I've seen these messages on Technorati:
"My bad… . [ IMG i-broke-youtube] Here is a deal… we was only uploading my many new video as well as it seems similar to we contingency have pennyless YouTube . we figured which possibly my video sucked so bad which we killed YouTube or simply YouTube only had an allergic greeting as well as it should be recuperating shortly. What have been your thoughts ? Will YouTube have it by this dire time ? Don’t be insane during Garry Conn, we didn’t intentionally kill YouTube, we suspicion my video rocked! [ IMG GarryConn] [ IMG]"
I've seen this twice.
What's the deal? Is someone trying to destroy YouTube? Is this a joke?
"My bad… . [ IMG i-broke-youtube] Here is a deal… we was only uploading my many new video as well as it seems similar to we contingency have pennyless YouTube . we figured which possibly my video sucked so bad which we killed YouTube or simply YouTube only had an allergic greeting as well as it should be recuperating shortly. What have been your thoughts ? Will YouTube have it by this dire time ? Don’t be insane during Garry Conn, we didn’t intentionally kill YouTube, we suspicion my video rocked! [ IMG GarryConn] [ IMG]"
I've seen this twice.
What's the deal? Is someone trying to destroy YouTube? Is this a joke?
Has YouTube Crashed 4 Days Before The CNN / YouTube Republican Debate?
Wow. It's Sunday, November 25th at 10 AM.
For some reason, when I go to http://www.youtube.com I get this message:
"Http/1.1 Service Unavailable"
That's wild. It also means I can't review my video traffic or upload videos for the CNN / YouTube Debate. I tried to get to YouTube via my FireFox Browser, but again, I got:
"Http/1.1 Service Unavailable"
So what's going on, I don't know. I just know that in all the time I've used YouTube.com, I've never seen this. And it's certainly impacting the business of thousands of people, including CNN.
Yikes!
Saturday, November 24, 2007
CNN / YouTube Republican Debate On Wednesday - Not Too Late To Get In Your Video!
A creation of The CNN / YouTube Debate System
On Wednesday, the CNN / YouTube Republican Debate will be held in St. Petersburgh, Florida. This is the long-awaited second of the debates of the successful CNN / YouTube partnership. I expect the star of the debate not to be the videos, but exchanges between Ron Paul and the other GOP candidates -- forget the "Quarter Question."
As some of your know who are regular visitors to this space, my question -- "The Quarter Question" -- was part of the Democratic CNN / YouTube debate process. And as some of you remember, I was a guest on the CNN Roland Martin Show as well as on local Channel Five here in Oakland. So basically CNN and YouTube launched my career as a political commentator. But because of that, my questions may not be picked this time around. I submitted nine of them, and I've got one more up my sleeve before the November 25th deadline.
Which reminds me to tell you that there's still time to get your questions in. Regardless of what CNN does with me, I think it's the greatest debate format ever done and is so right for its time, it could not have been done even four years ago.
Now as far as advice, my suggestion is to stick to questions that concern the Republican Party. I've noticed that a heck of a lot of the submissions -- including mine -- have a "democratic" bent to them. I also read in the NYTimes that CNN Washington Bureau Chief David Borhman has stated that questions which pander to CNN will be rejected, so that excludes one question I submitted and was inspired by a segment of last week's "CNN Situation Room."
But, in their racially ignorant way, the NYTimes -- which employs a writer who managed to present me as two different people in two consecutive paragraphs in an NYT article before the last CNN / YouTube debate -- managed to miss the obvious question to ask Bohrman: if by picking questions that deal with "Republican Issues" they will skip questions concerning race. At a time when the party's beset by divisive questions regarding how it treats African Americans, I can't imagine a debate that avoids that issue.
We shall see.
Ron Paul - Republican - Will Not Support The Republican Nominee Because Of Iraq War
Congressman Ron Paul said that he will not support the GOP nominee for the Presidential election because of the Republican Party's stance on the Iraq War.
Southern California Fires Blaze Again - Fires Return to Malibu, Burning 35 Homes
It's not hard to wonder if this is the work of arson.
MALIBU, Calif. — A fast-moving wildfire pushed by Santa Ana winds raced through the canyons and mountains of this wealthy enclave for the second time in little more than a month Saturday, destroying more than 30 homes and forcing as many as 14,000 residents to flee.
The fire erupted shortly before 3:30 a.m. PST after the long-predicted Santa Anas finally returned, and by late morning it had grown to 2,200 acres, or about 3.5 square miles, but winds began to die down.
"Waking up at 4 in the morning with the smell of smoke in your nose and the wind beating at the windows is something that we learn to live with here, but it always comes as something of a shock," said Mayor Jeff Jennings.
Twenty-three helicopters and airplanes, including a retardant-dropping DC-10 jumbo jet, attacked from the air while 1,700 firefighters battled flames on the ground. One firefighter suffered a minor eye injury.
"It's great to be able to say that we have no loss of lives," Jennings said. "We're sorry about the one injury that's been suffered, but it's certainly not as bad as it could have been."
Helicopters lowered hoses into pools and the nearby Pacific to refill their tanks for water-dropping runs, and SuperScooper amphibious airplanes skimmed the ocean to reload.
Hundreds of firefighters and equipment from throughout the state had been positioned in Southern California for most of the week because of the predicted winds, which had been expected to blow most of the week but didn't arrive until late Friday.
Officials remained wary despite the decrease in wind speeds.
The mayor urged residents to "listen to your radios, go outside and see which way the wind is blowing. Stay alert. Stay vigilant."
An estimated 35 homes were destroyed, and 10,000 to 14,000 people evacuated, said Los Angeles County Fire Chief P. Michael Freeman.
The fire broke out along a dirt road off a paved highway, and there did not appear to be power lines in the area, Freeman said. Investigators were trying to determine the cause, he said.
Another fire broke out Saturday morning in San Diego County near the town of Ramona and was 40 percent contained after burning 50 acres, said Roxanne Provanik, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Power lines blown down by fierce winds caused last month's 4,565-acre Canyon Fire in Malibu that destroyed six homes, two businesses and a church. That blaze was part of siege of more than 15 Santa Ana-stoked wildfires that destroyed more than 2,000 homes, killed 14 people and blackened a total of 809 square miles between Los Angeles County and the U.S.-Mexico border.
Santa Anas, triggered by high pressure over the Great Basin, blow into Southern California from the north and northeast, racing down through the canyons and passes of the region's east-west mountain ranges and out to sea, pushing back the normal flow of moist ocean air.
Malibu, with homes tucked into deep and narrow canyons along 27 miles of coast on the southern foot of the Santa Monica Mountains, is prone to Santa Ana-driven wildfires. Among them was a 1993 blaze that destroyed 388 structures, including 268 homes, and killed three people.
Saturday's fire burned to the west of the portions of Malibu that burned in October.
Neighbors alerted one another, while authorities drove through Corral Canyon, a neighborhood of about 350 homes, telling people to leave.
Meredith Lobel-Angel, 51, and her husband, Frank Angel, 54, said they had 15 minutes to leave their split-level home and managed to take little other than some clothes and their laptops.
"I ran out on the deck and I just saw a little fire and smoke up the canyon on the ridge (about a mile away)," Frank Angel said. "By the time we evacuated it was already over the ridge. It spread faster than I've ever seen it."
Carol Stoddard, 48, was told by firefighters that her home was probably gone. The 3,500-square-foot, seven-level home was worth $2 million.
Stoddard, a freelance videographer and photographer, captured some of the fire's destruction as trees beside her home and her collection of 12 uninsured cars burned.
"I stayed there until I couldn't breathe and the embers were flying everywhere," she said. "It was dark and I was standing around my house. I couldn't see. I couldn't grab enough stuff that was of importance like my passport."
As a precaution, officials at Pepperdine University told its students to move to a campus shelter, although the school remained largely empty because of the holiday weekend.
"Prior to the Thanksgiving holiday I was told the weather conditions was Santa Ana winds and we all know what that means," said university spokesman Jerry Derloshon.
Stoddard was philosophical about the probability that her house was gone and said she was determined to stay in Malibu no matter what the conditions.
"I'll maybe live in a tepee," she said.
___
Associated Press writer Noaki Schwartz in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
MALIBU, Calif. — A fast-moving wildfire pushed by Santa Ana winds raced through the canyons and mountains of this wealthy enclave for the second time in little more than a month Saturday, destroying more than 30 homes and forcing as many as 14,000 residents to flee.
The fire erupted shortly before 3:30 a.m. PST after the long-predicted Santa Anas finally returned, and by late morning it had grown to 2,200 acres, or about 3.5 square miles, but winds began to die down.
"Waking up at 4 in the morning with the smell of smoke in your nose and the wind beating at the windows is something that we learn to live with here, but it always comes as something of a shock," said Mayor Jeff Jennings.
Twenty-three helicopters and airplanes, including a retardant-dropping DC-10 jumbo jet, attacked from the air while 1,700 firefighters battled flames on the ground. One firefighter suffered a minor eye injury.
"It's great to be able to say that we have no loss of lives," Jennings said. "We're sorry about the one injury that's been suffered, but it's certainly not as bad as it could have been."
Helicopters lowered hoses into pools and the nearby Pacific to refill their tanks for water-dropping runs, and SuperScooper amphibious airplanes skimmed the ocean to reload.
Hundreds of firefighters and equipment from throughout the state had been positioned in Southern California for most of the week because of the predicted winds, which had been expected to blow most of the week but didn't arrive until late Friday.
Officials remained wary despite the decrease in wind speeds.
The mayor urged residents to "listen to your radios, go outside and see which way the wind is blowing. Stay alert. Stay vigilant."
An estimated 35 homes were destroyed, and 10,000 to 14,000 people evacuated, said Los Angeles County Fire Chief P. Michael Freeman.
The fire broke out along a dirt road off a paved highway, and there did not appear to be power lines in the area, Freeman said. Investigators were trying to determine the cause, he said.
Another fire broke out Saturday morning in San Diego County near the town of Ramona and was 40 percent contained after burning 50 acres, said Roxanne Provanik, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Power lines blown down by fierce winds caused last month's 4,565-acre Canyon Fire in Malibu that destroyed six homes, two businesses and a church. That blaze was part of siege of more than 15 Santa Ana-stoked wildfires that destroyed more than 2,000 homes, killed 14 people and blackened a total of 809 square miles between Los Angeles County and the U.S.-Mexico border.
Santa Anas, triggered by high pressure over the Great Basin, blow into Southern California from the north and northeast, racing down through the canyons and passes of the region's east-west mountain ranges and out to sea, pushing back the normal flow of moist ocean air.
Malibu, with homes tucked into deep and narrow canyons along 27 miles of coast on the southern foot of the Santa Monica Mountains, is prone to Santa Ana-driven wildfires. Among them was a 1993 blaze that destroyed 388 structures, including 268 homes, and killed three people.
Saturday's fire burned to the west of the portions of Malibu that burned in October.
Neighbors alerted one another, while authorities drove through Corral Canyon, a neighborhood of about 350 homes, telling people to leave.
Meredith Lobel-Angel, 51, and her husband, Frank Angel, 54, said they had 15 minutes to leave their split-level home and managed to take little other than some clothes and their laptops.
"I ran out on the deck and I just saw a little fire and smoke up the canyon on the ridge (about a mile away)," Frank Angel said. "By the time we evacuated it was already over the ridge. It spread faster than I've ever seen it."
Carol Stoddard, 48, was told by firefighters that her home was probably gone. The 3,500-square-foot, seven-level home was worth $2 million.
Stoddard, a freelance videographer and photographer, captured some of the fire's destruction as trees beside her home and her collection of 12 uninsured cars burned.
"I stayed there until I couldn't breathe and the embers were flying everywhere," she said. "It was dark and I was standing around my house. I couldn't see. I couldn't grab enough stuff that was of importance like my passport."
As a precaution, officials at Pepperdine University told its students to move to a campus shelter, although the school remained largely empty because of the holiday weekend.
"Prior to the Thanksgiving holiday I was told the weather conditions was Santa Ana winds and we all know what that means," said university spokesman Jerry Derloshon.
Stoddard was philosophical about the probability that her house was gone and said she was determined to stay in Malibu no matter what the conditions.
"I'll maybe live in a tepee," she said.
___
Associated Press writer Noaki Schwartz in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
Ny Observer's Steve Kornacki Hammers CNN For "Fixed" Democratic Debate
This is definitely "terring them a new one" in every sence of the words.
As soon as last Thursday’s 128-minute Democratic presidential debate concluded, CNN called on two analysts—part of what the cable channel has dubiously and incessantly branded “the best political team on television”—to interpret what had just transpired for the several million viewers at home.
Not surprisingly, James Carville, one of Bill and Hillary’s closest friends, and David Gergen, a Clinton (and other) White House alum, agreed that it had been a winning night for Hillary Clinton. Apparently, Harry and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason weren’t available.
The use of Mr. Carville, and to a lesser extent Mr. Gergen, provoked some criticism, with watchdogs griping that CNN didn’t properly disclose its conflicts. But disclosure isn’t really the issue. The question is why, given the endless supply of eager political pundits who are unaffiliated with the Clintons and every other campaign, CNN ever offered such a prominent spot to Mr. Carville and Mr. Gergen in the first place.
Not that it was the only insult to viewers last Thursday.
Once the gold standard for all-news television, the Cable News Network used the night to make a convincing argument that it should never again be entrusted with a presidential debate.
The network’s journalistic crimes are legion, starting with how the debate—which, at least in theory, is supposed to serve as a public service to voters—was promoted. In full-page ads, CNN cast it as pure sport, a boxing match in which “the gloves will come off.” Really? How would CNN know ahead of time that that this would be a contentious forum, especially after most of the previous debates had been tame, unless they were planning to force conflict?
There was also the warm-up act, a full-hour of Lou Dobbs fulminating against illegal immigrants and reading letters from adoring and sycophantic viewers, all presented by CNN as some sort of debate preview. This is the same Mr. Dobbs who has done little to quell talk that he himself wants to run for President next year. (Not that this came up on CNN, either.)
It got worse when it was time for the actual debate. First, CNN persisted with the prize-fighting motif, with moderator Wolf Blitzer playing the Michael Buffer role and calling the candidates to the stage individually, like boxers entering the ring. Then Mr. Blitzer introduced Campbell Brown, John Roberts, and Suzanne Malveaux, fellow CNN personalities who would join in the questioning.
“They are part of the very best political team,” he informed viewers.
As the candidates were fitted with their microphones—shouldn’t that have been done backstage?—Mr. Blitzer awkwardly handed off to analyst Gloria Borger, who stuck with the boxing imagery as she told viewers which candidates could be expected to come out “swinging” in the public policy forum they were about to watch.
If CNN was intent on giving America a fight, it could have at least tried to put on a fair one.
But the audience at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas was slanted heavily in favor of New York’s junior senator. One of the first questions of the night, from Mr. Blitzer, sought to incite a tangle between Barack Obama and Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton used her turn to criticize Mr. Obama’s health care plan, but when Mr. Obama began, loud shouts from the audience distracted him and viewers at home.
So pro-Clinton was the crowd that Mrs. Clinton needed only to pause for a beat during an answer and the audience would fill the vacuum with raucous cheers. Meanwhile, when Mr. Obama and John Edwards sought to engage Mrs. Clinton, they were shouted down.
Conspiracy theorists will say that CNN had packed the crowd for its old friend. But the audience imbalance, like the inclusion of Mr. Carville and Mr. Gergen, was more an indictment of CNN’s incompetence. The network farmed out the distribution of tickets without insisting on any kind of balance. The resulting Clinton rah-rahing was both distracting and misleading to viewers.
Similar incompetence was at work in the framing of questions. Time and again, candidates were presented with simplistic hypothetical scenarios and told to pick one side. They were invariably presented false choices—human rights or national security?—but if they failed to provide direct answers, they risked looking like typically evasive politicians.
And nothing but incompetence can explain why CNN decided to end on a “cute” question, prodding a UNLV student—who had hoped to quiz the candidates on the Yucca Mountain issue—to inquire if Mrs. Clinton preferred diamonds or pearls.
Knockout stuff.
As soon as last Thursday’s 128-minute Democratic presidential debate concluded, CNN called on two analysts—part of what the cable channel has dubiously and incessantly branded “the best political team on television”—to interpret what had just transpired for the several million viewers at home.
Not surprisingly, James Carville, one of Bill and Hillary’s closest friends, and David Gergen, a Clinton (and other) White House alum, agreed that it had been a winning night for Hillary Clinton. Apparently, Harry and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason weren’t available.
The use of Mr. Carville, and to a lesser extent Mr. Gergen, provoked some criticism, with watchdogs griping that CNN didn’t properly disclose its conflicts. But disclosure isn’t really the issue. The question is why, given the endless supply of eager political pundits who are unaffiliated with the Clintons and every other campaign, CNN ever offered such a prominent spot to Mr. Carville and Mr. Gergen in the first place.
Not that it was the only insult to viewers last Thursday.
Once the gold standard for all-news television, the Cable News Network used the night to make a convincing argument that it should never again be entrusted with a presidential debate.
The network’s journalistic crimes are legion, starting with how the debate—which, at least in theory, is supposed to serve as a public service to voters—was promoted. In full-page ads, CNN cast it as pure sport, a boxing match in which “the gloves will come off.” Really? How would CNN know ahead of time that that this would be a contentious forum, especially after most of the previous debates had been tame, unless they were planning to force conflict?
There was also the warm-up act, a full-hour of Lou Dobbs fulminating against illegal immigrants and reading letters from adoring and sycophantic viewers, all presented by CNN as some sort of debate preview. This is the same Mr. Dobbs who has done little to quell talk that he himself wants to run for President next year. (Not that this came up on CNN, either.)
It got worse when it was time for the actual debate. First, CNN persisted with the prize-fighting motif, with moderator Wolf Blitzer playing the Michael Buffer role and calling the candidates to the stage individually, like boxers entering the ring. Then Mr. Blitzer introduced Campbell Brown, John Roberts, and Suzanne Malveaux, fellow CNN personalities who would join in the questioning.
“They are part of the very best political team,” he informed viewers.
As the candidates were fitted with their microphones—shouldn’t that have been done backstage?—Mr. Blitzer awkwardly handed off to analyst Gloria Borger, who stuck with the boxing imagery as she told viewers which candidates could be expected to come out “swinging” in the public policy forum they were about to watch.
If CNN was intent on giving America a fight, it could have at least tried to put on a fair one.
But the audience at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas was slanted heavily in favor of New York’s junior senator. One of the first questions of the night, from Mr. Blitzer, sought to incite a tangle between Barack Obama and Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton used her turn to criticize Mr. Obama’s health care plan, but when Mr. Obama began, loud shouts from the audience distracted him and viewers at home.
So pro-Clinton was the crowd that Mrs. Clinton needed only to pause for a beat during an answer and the audience would fill the vacuum with raucous cheers. Meanwhile, when Mr. Obama and John Edwards sought to engage Mrs. Clinton, they were shouted down.
Conspiracy theorists will say that CNN had packed the crowd for its old friend. But the audience imbalance, like the inclusion of Mr. Carville and Mr. Gergen, was more an indictment of CNN’s incompetence. The network farmed out the distribution of tickets without insisting on any kind of balance. The resulting Clinton rah-rahing was both distracting and misleading to viewers.
Similar incompetence was at work in the framing of questions. Time and again, candidates were presented with simplistic hypothetical scenarios and told to pick one side. They were invariably presented false choices—human rights or national security?—but if they failed to provide direct answers, they risked looking like typically evasive politicians.
And nothing but incompetence can explain why CNN decided to end on a “cute” question, prodding a UNLV student—who had hoped to quiz the candidates on the Yucca Mountain issue—to inquire if Mrs. Clinton preferred diamonds or pearls.
Knockout stuff.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Angry Man In A Box In San Francisco
This is a slice of a few seconds of life. I was walking along toward the Web 2.0 Expo conference earlier this year, when this voice from the box was basically scaring people. So I got my camcorder and went back to film him in action
SCARY MARY - Video Recasts Mary Poppins As A Horror Flick
I don't know if you've seen this, but check it out.
According to the description:
This recut of the Disney classic 'Mary Poppins' was made by myself (Chris Rule), with assistance by Nick Eckert. This is TOP-QUALITY for YouTube and TAG-FREE.
This contains the musical piece "A Violent Attack" composed by Caine Davidson for the film 'An American Haunting,' "Stay Awake" written by Richard and Robert Sherman for Disney's 'Mary Poppins,' and stock sounds from iMovie.
According to the description:
This recut of the Disney classic 'Mary Poppins' was made by myself (Chris Rule), with assistance by Nick Eckert. This is TOP-QUALITY for YouTube and TAG-FREE.
This contains the musical piece "A Violent Attack" composed by Caine Davidson for the film 'An American Haunting,' "Stay Awake" written by Richard and Robert Sherman for Disney's 'Mary Poppins,' and stock sounds from iMovie.
Incompetence At The Highest Level- Part 1
In a business environment, it is imperative for managers and executives to foster
teamwork,facilitate group problem solving and focus the group’s attention and
enthusiasm on continuous improvement. Naturally, it is a forgone conclusion to expectthat the federal government is well equipped and prepared to protect the American people,guide them through destructive and tumultuous times and provide hope and optimism,instead of negativity and despair. It has become increasingly evident over the past seven years that through dishonesty, amateur style leadership and unskilled and unprofessional men and women, the American taxpayers have lived through destructive and abominable events that will forever persist. Moreover, incompetence has reigned supreme in Washington.
When the war in Iraq was first sanctioned by the 109th Congress back in 2003, our commander and chiefs approval rating skyrocketed to its highest mark ever and democrats and republicans were in agreement about the goal at hand. What has precipitated over the past four disheartening years has been wasteful spending to the tune of over $800 billion, more than 3,800 lost lives and continuous lies and mishaps by our leaders in charge.
Of the $18.4 billion allocated by Congress last year for the reconstruction of Iraq,
only $1.1 billion has been spent because of increased tension, and a mere 110,000 out of the 800,000 intended jobs for Iraqis have been established. It’s evident that somewhere someone has floundered miserably. Additionally, this dictates that President Bush’s stern words of ‘’stay the course’’ was nothing more than an unrelenting lie to deceive the American people into thinking progress was being made in the Middle East and that our brave troops would one day be able to return to home. According to Nebraska senator Chuck Hagel, the performance of our administration is ‘’beyond pitiful and embarrassing’’.
General after general in Iraq has failed to bring any level of sustainability to the region and above all has failed to securely protect the interests and safety of
Americans by permitting insurgents to regain charge. In the workplace, when an employee does not adequately master the mission statement of the company they are handed their walking papers. Conversely, the American people have been forced to pay theconsequences of their governments wrong doings as they face the calculated risk of another terrorist attack, see their taxes escalate as President Bush is handed a blank check, fall victim to increased security checks at the airport and watch their way of life reform drastically before their very eyes.
teamwork,facilitate group problem solving and focus the group’s attention and
enthusiasm on continuous improvement. Naturally, it is a forgone conclusion to expectthat the federal government is well equipped and prepared to protect the American people,guide them through destructive and tumultuous times and provide hope and optimism,instead of negativity and despair. It has become increasingly evident over the past seven years that through dishonesty, amateur style leadership and unskilled and unprofessional men and women, the American taxpayers have lived through destructive and abominable events that will forever persist. Moreover, incompetence has reigned supreme in Washington.
When the war in Iraq was first sanctioned by the 109th Congress back in 2003, our commander and chiefs approval rating skyrocketed to its highest mark ever and democrats and republicans were in agreement about the goal at hand. What has precipitated over the past four disheartening years has been wasteful spending to the tune of over $800 billion, more than 3,800 lost lives and continuous lies and mishaps by our leaders in charge.
Of the $18.4 billion allocated by Congress last year for the reconstruction of Iraq,
only $1.1 billion has been spent because of increased tension, and a mere 110,000 out of the 800,000 intended jobs for Iraqis have been established. It’s evident that somewhere someone has floundered miserably. Additionally, this dictates that President Bush’s stern words of ‘’stay the course’’ was nothing more than an unrelenting lie to deceive the American people into thinking progress was being made in the Middle East and that our brave troops would one day be able to return to home. According to Nebraska senator Chuck Hagel, the performance of our administration is ‘’beyond pitiful and embarrassing’’.
General after general in Iraq has failed to bring any level of sustainability to the region and above all has failed to securely protect the interests and safety of
Americans by permitting insurgents to regain charge. In the workplace, when an employee does not adequately master the mission statement of the company they are handed their walking papers. Conversely, the American people have been forced to pay theconsequences of their governments wrong doings as they face the calculated risk of another terrorist attack, see their taxes escalate as President Bush is handed a blank check, fall victim to increased security checks at the airport and watch their way of life reform drastically before their very eyes.
Happy Thanksgiving Everyone
Hey everyone! Just a note to say "Happy Thanksgiving" and be thankful for all that you have, regardless of if it's a lot or a little and cherish the people around you!
Priest Holmes ends short comeback, retires from NFL
By DOUG TUCKER, AP Sports Writer
November 21, 2007
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- What drove Priest Holmes out of the NFL is something most football players try to drive out of their thoughts.
They know it's a dangerous, violent endeavor that can leave them unable to walk. Holmes, after making one of the most improbable comebacks in NFL history, decided that as much as he loves the game, it wasn't worth the risk of a paralysis.
So the former Pro Bowl running back retired on Wednesday, thanking the Kansas City Chiefs and the NFL for all they had done.
"I had to look at the situation for what it is," he said, flanked by Kansas City Chiefs president Carl Peterson on one side and his three young sons on the other.
He had been out of the game for 22 months after sustaining head and neck injuries in a game in 2005. Then he called Peterson in June and told him he wanted to try a comeback.
He made it, too, after working so hard he earned the admiration of everyone who was watching. He made two starts in place of injured Larry Johnson the past two weeks. But last Sunday during a game at Indianapolis, he began to feel certain symptoms that doctors had warned him to watch for.
He refused to be specific, but during an often rambling series of answers said paralysis had been a possibility if he kept playing.
"Much of that is, I guess you could say, in the past," he said. "Just to know the symptoms were similar to the ones before. But to be technical, to go into medical terms, I wouldn't feel comfortable."
His teammates seemed unanimous in their respect for the man who holds team career records for yards rushing.
"It's probably the best decision that he could make for himself, for the rest of his life and for his family," said wide receiver Eddie Kennison.
"I try not to think about the dangers of the game. I understand what they are. I know they're there. And no man really wants to go out of the game with an injury. But we chose this job to take those risks. That's just part of it."
Tight end Tony Gonzalez had teamed with Holmes a few years ago when they were part of one of the NFL's most explosive offenses.
"I told him my thoughts are with him and what an unbelievable career he's had," Gonzalez said. "But you've got to be smart about this thing. Football is not the end-all, be-all. There's definitely life after football. Priest is a guy who's prepared himself for it."
Although he's down to third-team running back Kolby Smith with Johnson out again this week, Herm Edwards felt like thanking Holmes when the running back told him he was calling it quits.
"I thanked him for what he's done for this football team," Edwards said. "He's done something most players would not even attempt to do. He didn't have to do this. He came back knowing that first of all, he had to make the team. What he went through for three months trying to come back, that set a precedent for a lot of young players, to witness a guy like this who had accomplished everything he had accomplished in his career."
Peterson said Holmes had an agreement with the club that he would alert the Chiefs the moment he felt any danger of recurring injury to the head or neck.
"That was our agreement," he said, "that if that ever happens, to whatever degree, we needed to know about it. And he adhered to that and was great about it."
Holmes is the Chiefs' all-time rushing leader with 6,070 yards. He accumulated 8,172 yards rushing in 11 seasons with Baltimore and Kansas City.
"I have truly been blessed with the opportunity to play in the National Football League," he said. "I will be forever grateful to the Hunt family and the Chiefs organization for the opportunity to come to Kansas City, where the community embraced me from Day 1."
Holmes was the 2002 Offensive Player of the Year after rushing for 1,615 yards in just 14 games in 2002. In one season, he set a then-NFL record with 27 touchdowns. The mark has since been broken twice.
After taking himself out of the game last Sunday against the Colts in the third quarter, Holmes went back in for a few plays.
"As much as we try to do everything we could to prepare me, there's just one thing that seems like we couldn't technically prepare for," Holmes said.
"Now that we've seen that, now that I've had some symptoms, there's nothing really the helmet can do to provide that protection and to allow me to do my job effectively. And we all know this is a business of performance."
Regrets? Not a single one, he said.
"There's nothing I'll look back and say, `Maybe there's something I could have done different.' There's no other shoes I'd like to fill and I'm pretty sure there's no one who would like to fill my shoes."
November 21, 2007
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- What drove Priest Holmes out of the NFL is something most football players try to drive out of their thoughts.
They know it's a dangerous, violent endeavor that can leave them unable to walk. Holmes, after making one of the most improbable comebacks in NFL history, decided that as much as he loves the game, it wasn't worth the risk of a paralysis.
So the former Pro Bowl running back retired on Wednesday, thanking the Kansas City Chiefs and the NFL for all they had done.
"I had to look at the situation for what it is," he said, flanked by Kansas City Chiefs president Carl Peterson on one side and his three young sons on the other.
He had been out of the game for 22 months after sustaining head and neck injuries in a game in 2005. Then he called Peterson in June and told him he wanted to try a comeback.
He made it, too, after working so hard he earned the admiration of everyone who was watching. He made two starts in place of injured Larry Johnson the past two weeks. But last Sunday during a game at Indianapolis, he began to feel certain symptoms that doctors had warned him to watch for.
He refused to be specific, but during an often rambling series of answers said paralysis had been a possibility if he kept playing.
"Much of that is, I guess you could say, in the past," he said. "Just to know the symptoms were similar to the ones before. But to be technical, to go into medical terms, I wouldn't feel comfortable."
His teammates seemed unanimous in their respect for the man who holds team career records for yards rushing.
"It's probably the best decision that he could make for himself, for the rest of his life and for his family," said wide receiver Eddie Kennison.
"I try not to think about the dangers of the game. I understand what they are. I know they're there. And no man really wants to go out of the game with an injury. But we chose this job to take those risks. That's just part of it."
Tight end Tony Gonzalez had teamed with Holmes a few years ago when they were part of one of the NFL's most explosive offenses.
"I told him my thoughts are with him and what an unbelievable career he's had," Gonzalez said. "But you've got to be smart about this thing. Football is not the end-all, be-all. There's definitely life after football. Priest is a guy who's prepared himself for it."
Although he's down to third-team running back Kolby Smith with Johnson out again this week, Herm Edwards felt like thanking Holmes when the running back told him he was calling it quits.
"I thanked him for what he's done for this football team," Edwards said. "He's done something most players would not even attempt to do. He didn't have to do this. He came back knowing that first of all, he had to make the team. What he went through for three months trying to come back, that set a precedent for a lot of young players, to witness a guy like this who had accomplished everything he had accomplished in his career."
Peterson said Holmes had an agreement with the club that he would alert the Chiefs the moment he felt any danger of recurring injury to the head or neck.
"That was our agreement," he said, "that if that ever happens, to whatever degree, we needed to know about it. And he adhered to that and was great about it."
Holmes is the Chiefs' all-time rushing leader with 6,070 yards. He accumulated 8,172 yards rushing in 11 seasons with Baltimore and Kansas City.
"I have truly been blessed with the opportunity to play in the National Football League," he said. "I will be forever grateful to the Hunt family and the Chiefs organization for the opportunity to come to Kansas City, where the community embraced me from Day 1."
Holmes was the 2002 Offensive Player of the Year after rushing for 1,615 yards in just 14 games in 2002. In one season, he set a then-NFL record with 27 touchdowns. The mark has since been broken twice.
After taking himself out of the game last Sunday against the Colts in the third quarter, Holmes went back in for a few plays.
"As much as we try to do everything we could to prepare me, there's just one thing that seems like we couldn't technically prepare for," Holmes said.
"Now that we've seen that, now that I've had some symptoms, there's nothing really the helmet can do to provide that protection and to allow me to do my job effectively. And we all know this is a business of performance."
Regrets? Not a single one, he said.
"There's nothing I'll look back and say, `Maybe there's something I could have done different.' There's no other shoes I'd like to fill and I'm pretty sure there's no one who would like to fill my shoes."
J.C. Watts, Mitt Romney, Diversity - CNN / YouTube Question
This is my latest CNN / YouTube Republican Debate Question. and it was inspired by today's "The Situation Room":
Hi I'm Zennie Abraham in Oakland, CA.
On November 21st, Former Oklahoma Congressman and CNN "The Situation Room" Contributor J.C. Watts asserted and complained that your campaign Governor Romney didn't have a single African American staffer.
This question is for all of the candidates: do you have more than one African American employee on your campaign, and if you're going to ask for votes of African Americans, can you realistically do so without having someone who works for you who looks like they do?
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Cinncinati Reds Manager Dusty Baker Supports Barack Obama
As an "opener" to Barack Obama's November 14th 2007 speech in San Francisco, new Cinncinati Reds and former Chicago Cubs and San Francisco Giants manager Dusty Baker gave a great speech explaining why he supports Barack Obama for President and empasizing Senator Obama's concern for the environment as a key reason. I didn't expect Dusty to be so good without notes, but he did it; he talked well.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Pew Poll African Americans Divided Over Identity
My friend who's a frequent reader of my blog sent me this news below. My personal view is it's about time we had a poll of this type. I'm not surprised at the report.
Blacks See Growing Values Gap Between Poor and Middle Class
Optimism about Black Progress Declines
November 13, 2007
Download the complete report
African Americans see a widening gulf between the values of middle class and poor blacks, and nearly four-in-ten say that because of the diversity within their community, blacks can no longer be thought of as a single race.
The new nationwide Pew Research Center survey also finds blacks less upbeat about the state of black progress now than at any time since 1983. Looking backward, just one-in-five blacks say things are better for blacks now than they were five years ago. Looking ahead, fewer than half of all blacks (44%) say they think life for blacks will get better in the future, down from the 57% who said so in a 1986 survey.
Whites have a different perspective. While they, too, have grown less sanguine about black progress, they are nearly twice as likely as blacks to see black gains in the past five years. Also, a majority of whites (56%) say life for blacks in this country will get better in the future.
Telephone interviews for this survey were conducted among a nationally representative sample of 3,086 adults from September 5-October 6, 2007. African Americans and Hispanics were over-sampled - a total of 1007 interviews were completed with blacks, and 388 with Hispanics.
Other key findings include:
Asked whether blacks can still be thought of as a single race, given the increasing diversity within the black community, 53% of blacks say they can, but 37% of blacks say they cannot.
Big gaps in perception between blacks and whites emerge on many topics. For example, blacks believe that anti-black discrimination is still pervasive in everyday life; whites disagree. And blacks have far less confidence than whites in the basic fairness of the criminal justice system.
But there are also areas of agreement. For example, blacks and whites concur that there has been a convergence in the values held by blacks and whites. On the popular culture front, large majorities of both blacks and whites say that rap and hip hop have a bad influence on society.
Blacks and whites express very little overt racial animosity. As they have for decades, about eight-in-ten members of each racial group express a favorable view about members of the other group. More than eight-in-ten adults in each group also say they know a person of a different race whom they consider a friend.
The most newsworthy African American figure in politics today - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama - draws broadly (though not intensely felt) favorable ratings from both blacks and whites. But blacks are more inclined to say that his race will detract from his chances to be elected president; whites are more inclined to say his relative inexperience will hurt his chances.
Three-quarters of blacks (76%) say that Obama is a good influence on the black community. Even greater numbers say this about Oprah Winfrey (87%) and Bill Cosby (85%), who are the most highly regarded by blacks from among 14 black newsmakers tested in this survey. By contrast, just 17% of blacks say that rap artist 50 Cent is a good influence.
Over the past two decades, blacks have lost some confidence in the effectiveness of leaders within their community, including national black political figures, the clergy, and the NAACP. A sizable majority of blacks still see all of these groups as either very or somewhat effective, but the number saying "very" effective has declined since 1986.
A 53% majority of African Americans say that blacks who don't get ahead are mainly responsible for their situation, while just three-in-ten say discrimination is mainly to blame. As recently as the mid-1990s, black opinion on this question tilted in the opposite direction, with a majority of African Americans saying then that discrimination is the main reason for a lack of black progress.
On the issue of immigration, blacks and whites agree that most immigrants work harder than most blacks and most whites at low-wage jobs. Also, blacks are less inclined now than they were two decades ago to say that blacks would have more jobs if there were fewer immigrants.
Blacks See Growing Values Gap Between Poor and Middle Class
Optimism about Black Progress Declines
November 13, 2007
Download the complete report
African Americans see a widening gulf between the values of middle class and poor blacks, and nearly four-in-ten say that because of the diversity within their community, blacks can no longer be thought of as a single race.
The new nationwide Pew Research Center survey also finds blacks less upbeat about the state of black progress now than at any time since 1983. Looking backward, just one-in-five blacks say things are better for blacks now than they were five years ago. Looking ahead, fewer than half of all blacks (44%) say they think life for blacks will get better in the future, down from the 57% who said so in a 1986 survey.
Whites have a different perspective. While they, too, have grown less sanguine about black progress, they are nearly twice as likely as blacks to see black gains in the past five years. Also, a majority of whites (56%) say life for blacks in this country will get better in the future.
Telephone interviews for this survey were conducted among a nationally representative sample of 3,086 adults from September 5-October 6, 2007. African Americans and Hispanics were over-sampled - a total of 1007 interviews were completed with blacks, and 388 with Hispanics.
Other key findings include:
Asked whether blacks can still be thought of as a single race, given the increasing diversity within the black community, 53% of blacks say they can, but 37% of blacks say they cannot.
Big gaps in perception between blacks and whites emerge on many topics. For example, blacks believe that anti-black discrimination is still pervasive in everyday life; whites disagree. And blacks have far less confidence than whites in the basic fairness of the criminal justice system.
But there are also areas of agreement. For example, blacks and whites concur that there has been a convergence in the values held by blacks and whites. On the popular culture front, large majorities of both blacks and whites say that rap and hip hop have a bad influence on society.
Blacks and whites express very little overt racial animosity. As they have for decades, about eight-in-ten members of each racial group express a favorable view about members of the other group. More than eight-in-ten adults in each group also say they know a person of a different race whom they consider a friend.
The most newsworthy African American figure in politics today - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama - draws broadly (though not intensely felt) favorable ratings from both blacks and whites. But blacks are more inclined to say that his race will detract from his chances to be elected president; whites are more inclined to say his relative inexperience will hurt his chances.
Three-quarters of blacks (76%) say that Obama is a good influence on the black community. Even greater numbers say this about Oprah Winfrey (87%) and Bill Cosby (85%), who are the most highly regarded by blacks from among 14 black newsmakers tested in this survey. By contrast, just 17% of blacks say that rap artist 50 Cent is a good influence.
Over the past two decades, blacks have lost some confidence in the effectiveness of leaders within their community, including national black political figures, the clergy, and the NAACP. A sizable majority of blacks still see all of these groups as either very or somewhat effective, but the number saying "very" effective has declined since 1986.
A 53% majority of African Americans say that blacks who don't get ahead are mainly responsible for their situation, while just three-in-ten say discrimination is mainly to blame. As recently as the mid-1990s, black opinion on this question tilted in the opposite direction, with a majority of African Americans saying then that discrimination is the main reason for a lack of black progress.
On the issue of immigration, blacks and whites agree that most immigrants work harder than most blacks and most whites at low-wage jobs. Also, blacks are less inclined now than they were two decades ago to say that blacks would have more jobs if there were fewer immigrants.
Amazon Kindle Launches Today - Wireless E-Reading
I just saw that Amazon's come out with Kindle, which allow me to read on the go. A great idea. You can take many books in the space of one book. It reminds me of a device Captain Kirk used in "Star Trek" to read status reports given to him by Yeoman Rand.
It could be that the Amazon developers got the idea from Star Trek!
Monday, November 19, 2007
Obama Leada In Iowa, Stunning CNN in The Process!
Yep. Here's the news from ABC : Barack Obama's ahead 30 percent, 26 percent for Clinton, and John Edwards at 22 percent. Wolf Blitzer can't seem to stand that Obama's ahead of Clinton. They didn't mention that, or the Des Moines Register Poll, or the latest poll reporting Obama's lead at 4 percent.
Instead, CNN's Blitzer's focusing too much on other matters like the CIA leak, and totally ignoring Senator Clinton's major gaffe on Pakistan.
The Clinton News Network can't stand the news that Obama can win the Iowa Caucus.
Instead, CNN's Blitzer's focusing too much on other matters like the CIA leak, and totally ignoring Senator Clinton's major gaffe on Pakistan.
The Clinton News Network can't stand the news that Obama can win the Iowa Caucus.
ROBERT NOVAK *I'VE SEEN NO EVIDENCE OF DIRT ON OBAMA
In this video, Fox News interviews columnist Robert Novak, also called "The Prince of Darkness" who in this case spread darkness about Senator Barack Obama by stating that the Clinton campaign claimed to have news about a sex scandal about Obama. Novak -- in the video -- essentially that the source was not from the campaign but who was told by an agent of the campaign. In other words, his source has a source. It's called gossip and he's spreading it, but there's nothing there. Novak does compare Clinton to Nixon!
Mike Gravel - "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and You're Lying'
In this video, Former Senator and U.S. Presidential candidate Mike Gravel -- who was not invited to be in the Nevada debate -- held his own event where he responded to the answers given by the candidates, well, ok, Senator Clinton here. He says she's lying about Clinton's position on Iran, saying "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and you're lying. She's ignorant. The law that was past right after 9-11, coupled with the resolution that (U.S. Senator Joe Libermann) put in, gave the President the power to go to war."
It's not right that he was excluded; he'd have made the event informative and unforgetable as well as providing a great check for Hillary Clinton.
Vick Sells Virginia House At Big Loss
Report courtesy of www.wsbtv.com in Atlanta, Georgia.
SURRY, Va. -- Michael Vick has sold the Virginia house that was the headquarters of his dog fighting operation.
The Daily Press reported Friday that Todd Builders Inc. of Carrollton, Va. bought the house for $450,000.
The new owner plans to put the house up for auction on December 15.
The $450,000 price was below the home's assessed $747,000 value.
But that doesn't take into account the property's notoriety, said Kyle Hause Jr., the real estate agent who handled the sale.
"Only one person can own the most famous house in America today," Hause said. "You can ask people from coast to coast which house has the most notoriety in the country today, and it's this house."
The house at 1915 Moonlight Rd. was the home of Vick's Bad Newz kennels.
Dog fights were held at the property. Authorities found dog fighting equipment and 66 dogs when they raided the house back in April.
SURRY, Va. -- Michael Vick has sold the Virginia house that was the headquarters of his dog fighting operation.
The Daily Press reported Friday that Todd Builders Inc. of Carrollton, Va. bought the house for $450,000.
The new owner plans to put the house up for auction on December 15.
The $450,000 price was below the home's assessed $747,000 value.
But that doesn't take into account the property's notoriety, said Kyle Hause Jr., the real estate agent who handled the sale.
"Only one person can own the most famous house in America today," Hause said. "You can ask people from coast to coast which house has the most notoriety in the country today, and it's this house."
The house at 1915 Moonlight Rd. was the home of Vick's Bad Newz kennels.
Dog fights were held at the property. Authorities found dog fighting equipment and 66 dogs when they raided the house back in April.
3 Young Boys Arrested In Rape Case
This story is extremely disheartening and emotionally upsetting. It's unquenchable to believe that a crime of this magnitude could occur in any part of the country.
Report Courtesy of www.wsbtv.com in Atlanta, Georgia.
ACWORTH, Ga. -- Police say they've arrested three young boys on charges they kidnapped and raped an 11-year-old girl in the woods near an Acworth apartment complex.
Police say the boys -- who are 8 and 9 years old -- are in a Cobb County youth detention center but could face adult criminal charges.
"Reportedly two 9-year-old boys and one 8-year-old boy took the girl into the woods against her will where she was raped," said Capt. Wayne Bennard of the Acworth Police Department.
Police reports show the girl went to authorities Saturday for the alleged attack, which she says happened Thursday.
The victim told police they had been playing outside the West Ridge Apartments before the attack.
"The three boys have been charged with crimes ranging from rape, sexual assault, kidnapping and false imprisonment," said Bennard. "The reaction is dismay."
The suspects are being held at the Cobb County Youth Detention Center.
Prosecutors said they have yet to decide whether to try the suspects as adults.
"That decision hasn't been made," said Kathy Watkins, a spokeswoman for the Cobb County District Attorney's office.
Report Courtesy of www.wsbtv.com in Atlanta, Georgia.
ACWORTH, Ga. -- Police say they've arrested three young boys on charges they kidnapped and raped an 11-year-old girl in the woods near an Acworth apartment complex.
Police say the boys -- who are 8 and 9 years old -- are in a Cobb County youth detention center but could face adult criminal charges.
"Reportedly two 9-year-old boys and one 8-year-old boy took the girl into the woods against her will where she was raped," said Capt. Wayne Bennard of the Acworth Police Department.
Police reports show the girl went to authorities Saturday for the alleged attack, which she says happened Thursday.
The victim told police they had been playing outside the West Ridge Apartments before the attack.
"The three boys have been charged with crimes ranging from rape, sexual assault, kidnapping and false imprisonment," said Bennard. "The reaction is dismay."
The suspects are being held at the Cobb County Youth Detention Center.
Prosecutors said they have yet to decide whether to try the suspects as adults.
"That decision hasn't been made," said Kathy Watkins, a spokeswoman for the Cobb County District Attorney's office.
Gore / Obama Supporter - Gore Endorse Obama?
I asked the person in my video about Al Gore endorsing Barack Obama and had a hard time getting a straight answer out of her, but I did learn a lot about the Gore / Obama effort -- it seems that, as she said, it's there idea and a dream. But for me, it's really more than that as they have signs and shirts and a website.
They're really activists. The bottom line is that I can't remember an election where there were so many fringe groups formed around "dream tickets" -- can you?
Ron Paul Kicks Fox News Chris Wallace Into Abyss - Video
In this cool video that places Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul in the role of a Spartan as in the movie "300", Paul kicks Fox News Chris Wallace into an abyss. You've got to see it.
Tim Russert, LA Times Fixing Obama News - Media Makes Errors and Ommissions Regarding Barack Obama News
If you've wondered about those negative stories about Barack Obama and whether they were "fixed" here's your answer: yes they were. If you've ever wanted one place to see all of those errors and ommissions with regard to Senator Obama's presidential run, you've come to the right place.
It's all here. From the LA times excluding Senator Obama's specific statements on human rights and national security, to Time Russert's famous "fixed" Meet the Press questions that sounded as if they were written by the Clinton campaign, to CNN's misrepresentations of Senator Obama's statements about Hillary Clinton.
They're all here for you. Share this with a friend and tell them how the mainstream media's unfairly fixing news against Barack Obama. They can't laugh at you; it's all here!
Check it out.
It's all here. From the LA times excluding Senator Obama's specific statements on human rights and national security, to Time Russert's famous "fixed" Meet the Press questions that sounded as if they were written by the Clinton campaign, to CNN's misrepresentations of Senator Obama's statements about Hillary Clinton.
They're all here for you. Share this with a friend and tell them how the mainstream media's unfairly fixing news against Barack Obama. They can't laugh at you; it's all here!
Check it out.
LA Times claimed Obama was "less than definitive" on human rights vs. national security, but omitted his specific statements
Friday, November 16, 2007 5:07PM
Malveaux misrepresented Obama's statements about Clinton on Meet the Press
Friday, November 16, 2007 2:19PM
On CNN, Gergen distorted Obama's response regarding U.S. deaths in Iraq
Friday, November 16, 2007 1:40PM
GMA, NY Sun, Politico cut out part of Obama sentence in claiming he "stumbled" on driver's license question
Friday, November 16, 2007 12:10PM
AP falsely suggested Obama said his state Senate records do not "exist at all"
Thursday, November 15, 2007 6:11PM
AP claimed Obama's "mining lobbyist ties" are "raising questions" but did not say with whom
Thursday, November 15, 2007 5:45PM
On O'Reilly, Newsmax's Kessler misrepresented Obama and Clinton vote on FISA, Edwards statement on "global war on terror"
Wednesday, November 14, 2007 3:34PM
Russert misleadingly cropped Obama comment to claim he wasn't "firmly wedded against the war"
Sunday, November 11, 2007 4:43PM
Politico claimed Dems' energy plans "set[] goals so distant that they won't be met until most of these contenders might be dead"
Friday, November 9, 2007 5:19PM
Return of the "rookie mistake": Politico's Hearn blamed Obama for "flag flap"
Friday, November 9, 2007 2:38PM
Citing NPR story, Wash. Post's Kornblut falsely claimed Obama was "unresponsive to a voter in a campaign stop"
Thursday, November 8, 2007 4:49PM
Dobbs falsely claimed that Obama's "relationship with his faith [was] heretofore ... unexpressed"
Wednesday, November 7, 2007 4:33PM
ABC News still ignoring O'Reilly's Obama/GMA falsehood
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 1:21PM
Time's Halperin didn't check with Sun-Times columnist before falsely claiming that column was product of Clinton campaign opposition research
Monday, November 5, 2007 6:23PM
CNN's Situation Room ignored McCain's missed votes in back-to-back segments
Monday, November 5, 2007 5:35PM
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Raiders Daute Culpepper Misses Wide Open Wide Receiver Johnnie Lee Higgins (15) At End OF Vikings Game
You know, I've always believed that teams have their quarterback's just throw up the ball and hope someone comes down with it on their side at the end of a tight game. But I think it's become habit and so much so that quarterbacks miss wide open receivers on the way to the end zone.
The Oakland Raiders Daute Culpepper missed a wide open Wide Receiver Johnnie Lee Higgins (15) while dropping back to throw the hail mary pass.
I just watched a replay of the final play and the obvious was in full view: #15 was 10 yards in front of the next closest Vikings defender. He makes a catch; Raiders win.
But Dante never saw him.
Just another small reason the Raiders have two wins this year.
The Oakland Raiders Daute Culpepper missed a wide open Wide Receiver Johnnie Lee Higgins (15) while dropping back to throw the hail mary pass.
I just watched a replay of the final play and the obvious was in full view: #15 was 10 yards in front of the next closest Vikings defender. He makes a catch; Raiders win.
But Dante never saw him.
Just another small reason the Raiders have two wins this year.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)