Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Press Briefing Tony Snow 02/20/07 (VIDEO)

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, Tuesday, May 16, 2006, fields questions during his first briefing after replacing Scott McClellan. White House photo by Paul Morse.Press Briefing by Tony Snow, FULL STREAMING VIDEO. file is windows media format, running time is 31:12. White House Conference Center Briefing Room.
White House Press Secretary Tony Snow briefs the press and answers questions. 02/20/2007: WASHINGTON, DC: 12:12 P.M. EST.

MR. SNOW: Questions.

Q Do you have any reaction to the Court of Appeals decision on the Guantanamo Bay case?

MR. SNOW: Not at this point; taking a look at it. It came in this morning, but we'll assess it.

Q I mean, it's got to be good news for the administration.

MR. SNOW: Well, I mean, the court decided with the position that we put forward, but I don't want to try to get into any extended legal analysis of this. You've got to take a look -- our guys are reading through the opinion and I'll probably have more tomorrow.

Q John McCain is out there saying that Donald Rumsfeld may go down as one of the worst Defense Secretaries in history. Is that something you agree with? (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: I think on this one --

Q The Vice President has called him one of the -- if not, the best, I think.

MR. SNOW: Look, we think Donald Rumsfeld was an enormously consequential and effective Secretary of Defense, and somebody who led to the transformation of the Department of Defense. Senator McCain holds a different point of view. The thing that's important to us right now is that Senator McCain is a strong supporter of the President's position on the way forward in Iraq and somebody who has been an eloquent voice and a reliable leader on the issue, and we appreciate it.

Q Tony, could I just follow -- do you chalk this up to election politics?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to -- I left the chalk at home. (Laughter.)

Q The administration's mantra for a long time has been "support the troops." What is the reaction, then, when you read this series of stories in The Washington Post about troops coming home from Iraq, Afghanistan and being treated so poorly, apparently, based on this long investigation? What's the President's reaction?

MR. SNOW: There are a couple of things. First, it's not a mantra. I would really choose words carefully. It's a commitment to support the troops. And the President, as you know, has visited the wounded many times at Walter Reed and we are concerned about it. And the people who --

Q Were you aware?

MR. SNOW: We are aware now, yes. And I would refer you to the Department of Defense, which I know is taking a very close look at it, too.

Look, the men and women who have gone and fought for our country over there, they deserve the best care.

Q So why has that not been guaranteed, then?

MR. SNOW: I'm not sure that -- you know, when you find a problem, you deal with it.

Q So you're saying the President learned about this from The Washington Post?

MR. SNOW: I don't know exactly where he learned it, but I can tell you that we believe that they deserve better. And, again, Ed, this is something where I'd suggest you give DoD a call, because I know they've taken a good, hard look at it.

Q Tony, can I follow on that? As Bob Dole might ask, where's the outrage?

MR. SNOW: There's plenty of outrage.

Q Is there?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q So the President responded how when he learned about this? What, specifically -- did he order something to be done?

MR. SNOW: What I'm suggesting -- there's a reason I'm suggesting -- DoD is the proper place in which we'll be taking care of these issues. And I would refer you to them for comment. But this is something that's going to have to be an action item.

Q But is there any evidence that it was even looked at before the paper printed its two stories?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q Then tell us about that evidence.

MR. SNOW: That's why -- again, I would refer you, Bill, to the Department of the Army, which runs the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. This is the place where if you want to get --

Q That's just an easy way for you not to have to talk about it.

MR. SNOW: Well, it's also a way of pointing to the proper authorities, which is what you would want.

Q The White House doesn't want to be on record with a more emphatic expression of amazement and upset about this?

MR. SNOW: No. David asked where the outrage -- of course there's outrage that men and women who have been fighting have not received the outpatient care -- if you read the stories, there are many who are happy with it, some who are unhappy, and it's important that we show our commitment to the people who have served. I don't know what more you want me to do.

Q In December NPR ran a series looking at the quality of mental health care for Iraq veterans who have returned, showing that it's shocking how little care is provided to them. And several congresspeople -- Obama, Boxer and Bond -- sent a letter to the Pentagon, which you're referring us to, asking for an investigation, which they have not agreed to conduct. So you're referring us to the DoD, but they're not acting quickly on this. So does the President want them to act quickly?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, you've asked me about two separate stories.

Q It seems there's a problem that's endemic to the system.

MR. SNOW: Well, rather than leaping to a conclusion, as I said, I would suggest you call them, and then we can talk about it later.

Q Off camera this morning you said that you would have something at noon; you said, I'll talk about it then. And now you're not really --

MR. SNOW: Well, that's because -- again, I think that you may see some activity on it. And at this point I would refer you to the Department of Defense.

Q Is the system working?

MR. SNOW: Well, I'll tell you what -- is the system working? Yes. Is it working perfectly? No.

Q It's good enough?

MR. SNOW: No, I said, it's not good enough. I just told you it's not working perfectly. But there are also thousands of people who have been through the system who have been cared for. But it is important that we maintain a commitment to following up or providing the treatment that these men and women deserve.

Q Do you think the President is going to say something about this later?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q You responded to me a moment ago that the administration was aware of this before the articles appeared in the paper.

MR. SNOW: That is my understanding. But, again, this is something that's an action item over at the Department of Defense and, in particular, the Department of the Army. I am not fully briefed on the activities or who knew what, when. And I suggest --

Q Was the President aware of it? Was the White House aware of it?

MR. SNOW: I am not certain --

Q May I follow on --

Q What is the President's --

MR. SNOW: -- when we first became aware of it.* Now the President certainly has been aware of the conditions in the wards where he has visited, and visited regularly, and we also have people from Walter Reed regularly over to the White House as guests, sometimes in fairly large numbers. So as I said, the President is committed -- committed to these people, committed to men and women who have served. We need to make sure that whatever problems there are get fixed. I couldn't be any stronger or plainer about it.

Q Has he given any new orders?

MR. SNOW: No. At this point, Helen, I think the most important thing -- the way this would work is the Department of Army has its own investigation about what's going on at Walter Reed. They will be taking action. The President certainly wants to make sure that, as I said before, whatever problems there are get fixed.

Q On Walter Reed, a lot of the veterans, the medical community, the doctors, the neighbors who have worked at Walter Reed are very upset about this move, pending move to Bethesda. In light of everything that's happening, does the administration still support uprooting --

MR. SNOW: The Department of Defense has made the decision to consolidate the treatment facilities at the Bethesda Naval Medical Center.

Q Is there any chance of a second look? Some of the facilities at Walter Reed are brand new.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I'm just going to refer you to that. This is -- all of a sudden people are trying to open up different avenues of inquiry. The fact is that those changes have, in fact, been decided upon by the Department of Defense. I am not aware of any decisions to change.

Q To clarify, were these -- any actions that the Pentagon has taken, these action items, were they done on its own, or did they do this in response to some order from here?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not aware that anybody has -- look, when you have a problem like this, the imperative is to fix it. I'm not sure that you have to issue orders; there are people there who know if they've got a problem they need to fix it. So I don't think that -- I will try to find out for you, but I'm not aware that the President has cut any special orders. But I will try to get for you additional information.

Q I think what we're --

MR. SNOW: I know what you're trying to do, you're trying to get a tick-tock on what did he learn and how did he respond and who did he call.

Q Yes, we're trying to determine if someone here built a fire under someone over there to do something.

MR. SNOW: You know, that's assuming that people there are callous about the fate of the people who are serving.

Q It isn't --

MR. SNOW: No, I think it is. When you say "light a fire," it's as if, you know, you find out that there's a problem and you don't move quickly to try to correct it. My sense is that there's plenty of fire for trying to get it right. But this is why I'm telling you if you want a more direct answer about this, you do need to talk to the people at the Department of the Army --

Q But, Tony, when you read --

MR. SNOW: -- who are at the ground level involvement here.

Q -- an account that says a commanding general, quotes a commanding general as saying, well, gee, we ordered repairs done, but they weren't done -- you'd think they would have known this hadn't been accomplished.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, that's why -- you've just made my point, which is you need to get back to them, and I will also get back for you with a tick-tock about what's going on at this end.

Q It's not just -- you're describing kind of a cold, detached bureaucratic process. We all know how this works. Something like this, this kind of story gets people's attention. You are now --

MR. SNOW: Well --

Q Wait a minute. You're now in the PR business, you know if something like this happens it's at odds with the commitments you make; the Commander-in-Chief might well stand up at a meeting and say, darn it, let's get to the bottom of this now and let's get answers. And this happened over the weekend, and you're saying you think the White House knew, but you're not sure; you're not sure when the President knew or if he said something to somebody. It just seems like you should have those answers.

MR. SNOW: Okay, but you also -- fine, I'll try to get them for you. But when you talk about cold detachment, I don't think saying that if it needs --

Q You're calling it an "action item"?

MR. SNOW: Well, yes, because what I'm telling you is that it is something that falls under the providence of the Department of the Army. Therefore, if you want the detailed answers about who knew what, when and how it's been handled, you do need to ask them, because they're going to have the information, David.

I can tell you that the President feels passionately about them, and you should have no doubt about it -- you've been at enough events where when he looks these people in the eye there is a commitment, a strong, profound emotional commitment to the people who serve this country. And it is one where the President is committed to doing right by the men and women who serve. There should be no doubt about that.

Q But, Tony --

MR. SNOW: Wait, wait. In that case, what I'm telling you is let's sort through the facts. I know that what you want is for me to tell you more than I know right now. So you keep at it --

Q But it would not be unreasonable for you or the President, through you, to express some kind of outrage over what has happened up there.

MR. SNOW: Well, it's also a matter of trying to figure out precisely what has happened. You have news stories, it is important to investigate. As you know, the most important thing is to fix a problem, correct? And there is absolute determination to fix the problem. The President is somebody, again, whose passion for these forces should never, ever be a topic of doubt on the part of the forces or the American people.

Q Right, but Tony, when you say he looks in the eyes of the families -- but what if the bureaucrats on the ground are not actually following through on the commitment you say he has? Doesn't he have a duty to follow through and say, what --

MR. SNOW: That's why I'm asking you to direct your questions to the people who are in direct line of responsibility for this, who are going to have more information on this than I do right now.

Q What is your reaction of Major General Weightman, who is the Commander at Walter Reed, also says in the bottom of the article on Sunday in The Washington Post, said that he's concerned and that they're bracing for, "potentially a lot more casualties," people coming to Walter Reed because of the surge. Does that cause the White House to think at all about that policy, because you have the Commander of Walter Reed --

MR. SNOW: There are a whole series of things, and, again, this is why you need to talk to people who are in the chain, because --

Q But this he said on the record.

MR. SNOW: I understand, Ed. But there are a series of things. First, for Walter Reed, what you end up having is treatment of people who are wounded -- and also this is Bethesda, as you know, different sorts of injuries are treated at the two facilities. And many of those people are there for months. And this story deals with outpatient care after that treatment, right? So it's important, I think, to understand that you've got to be prepared for all things that are going to come your way, including getting the piece right when it comes to outpatient care, and continuing also to do well by inpatients.

But, again, I know you want me to -- I'm simply not going to go beyond what I know. And in this particular case, the people who do know the facts and do know what's going on, and do know how the investigations are proceeding are the guys over at DoD.

Q I think that's part of the question. It doesn't seem like -- beyond what you know, it doesn't seem like you're asking that many questions to find out. I mean, you have a limited knowledge about the situation.

MR. SNOW: It's because they're working the issue, and I'm telling you, those are the people to talk to, the DoD.

Q -- I mean, you keep putting me off on other people --

MR. SNOW: I know.

Q This is a commitment the President has made, you said, to the families, right?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q So why isn't the President, why isn't his staff saying, let's get to the bottom of it now?

MR. SNOW: We are trying to get to the bottom of it, and the people who are responsible for getting to the bottom of it work on the other side of the river.

Q But, again, you put it back on the Pentagon, you're not keeping --

MR. SNOW: Yes. The members of the Pentagon, of course, Cabinet agencies and people in the administration, do answer to the President. And I've said, what's wrong needs to be fixed. Now the people that are going to do the fixing are over there. So you might want to talk to them.

Q Tony, before entering Pakistan, the Indian train was ripped up by a terrorist bomb, undermining the India-Pakistan relations. But some experts in the area are saying because of problems in the area, including Afghanistan, because the ISI, the new Pakistani intelligence is at odds with General Musharraf, who may be trying his best to control terrorism in the area.

MR. SNOW: Well, I think what you've seen is Prime Minister Musharraf and also --

Q President.

MR. SNOW: President Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Singh -- thank you -- together have not only expressed their outrage about it, but they have promised to deal with it, which is what you would want them to do. We certainly express our condolences, and we despise acts of terror, period.

Q But can we make anything out of this at this junction of --

MR. SNOW: No. No, I know that you are trying to talk about other players in it, but, no. No.

Q Tony, how do you respond to the Iranian President's offer today, that his country will stop uranium enrichment if the Western nations stop theirs?

MR. SNOW: That's not the way the U.N. Security Council resolution reads. The fact is that we are perfectly happy to help Iran acquire civilian nuclear power. We are not, however -- and the international community has made it clear that Iran should not be in a position to develop or possess nuclear weapons. So that kind of -- that is a false offer because the position of the international community is clear.

And, furthermore, the offer, the offer of help, the offer of nuclear power for the Iranian people, that's out on the table, as well. So now it's the responsibility of the Iranians to step forward and act. As you know, there's a deadline tomorrow under U.N. Security Council resolution. The International Atomic Energy Agency will be reporting later in the week -- at least we think later in the week, certainly soon, on that situation. And we'll have to see how it develops. But the offer that the Iranians need to make is to suspend activity that could lead to the enrichment of nuclear material that could be used in creating a bomb.

Q Do you sense some softening from European leaders? They've sensed, or spoken out about a conciliatory tone from the Iranians in recent weeks.

MR. SNOW: Again, let's just wait and see what happens in the next few days, in terms of developments with the Iranians. In the sense that we have been pursuing diplomatic channels, I don't know if you want to call that conciliatory, but the fact is, the emphasis continues to be on diplomacy. And the United States is committed to diplomacy with the EU3 plus two, plus Russia and China. And we continue to work as aggressively as we can with that group, because as in the case of North Korea, people who have direct interest and influence over the major party are the ones that we think may lead to breakthroughs that could be good for the country and also for the international community.

Q Last one. The President has previously said, when questioned why Iran would need nuclear power, because it's got so much oil. Now there's a report out that Iran's oil production is declining, and looking to the future, it may need to shift to nuclear power.

MR. SNOW: Well, we've also said all along -- the quote that you're referring to, that your colleague sent me a little while ago, the President also at the back end of that quote talked about the fact that the Iranians have expressed a desire for civil nuclear power, and it's something that we have never opposed. Oil production in Iran right now is a fraction -- a little more than half of what it was before the revolution. So it's considerably down, and of course they do have some -- they have rising demand, they have low prices -- they have subsidized prices.

So we understand all of those things. We have no objection to the Iranians having civil nuclear power. We do have objections to their having the capability to have nuclear weapons.

Q Thank you, Tony. When we had our exchange about the new accord with Korea on Friday, it was also the last day at work for Dr. Bob Joseph, the Under Secretary for Arms Control and Disarmament. Did he disagree with the policy, and did he resign in protest over it?

MR. SNOW: Not that I'm aware of. In fact, I don't have any idea. (Laughter.)

Q The New York Times reported that privately he vehemently disagreed with it on Thursday. I just wanted to know if the resignation was --

MR. SNOW: You're going to have to ask him.

Q Can I ask you another one on Iran? To what extent are you concerned, based on their past track record, that they're going to try to stall this out with this U.N. deadline?

MR. SNOW: Well, I think -- I don't want to express premature concern. Let's see what happens. They've got 24 hours. But the one thing that they -- I think that has been demonstrated, with a Chapter 7 resolution, is that the United States and its allies in this are standing pretty firm in terms of sending a clear message to the government in Tehran.

We support the Iranian people, and we want to make sure that they have the ability to lead better lives and to have energy that is necessary to be able to create jobs and opportunities for them. But their government has to take that first step, in terms of renouncing nuclear ambitions. They say they don't have them, fine. There's a simple step to take, and in exchange you will get benefits that are going to be good for your country and are going to be good for your people. And that's the message that we continue to send through diplomatic channels, and it's an offer that we'll continue to make publicly from this podium.

Q Is Steve Hadley in Brussels or on his way to Brussels?

MR. SNOW: I don't know if he's left yet, but he will be traveling to Brussels, Berlin, and Moscow this week.

Q What's his mission?

MR. SNOW: There are ministerials with his colleagues, basically fellow national security advisors, and he will be doing -- typically there's going to be a meeting in Berlin. Often when he gets in the area he stops in Brussels, and that's typical, and he also received an invitation to visit Moscow, and he's accepted that one, as well.

Q Anything related to Iran nuclear --

MR. SNOW: I don't know -- I'm not going to predict what might come up, but, again, it all arose -- these meetings have been in the works for quite a while.

Victoria.

Q Tony, over the weekend you were asked by Wolf Blitzer, are you getting ready for war with Iran. And you replied, no, and furthermore I'm at a total loss to find any place where this administration has been trying to "create a run up with a war in Iran. It's interesting to me that it seems that politicians maybe are trying to protect Iran." Which politicians are trying to protect Iran?

MR. SNOW: Well, there's a -- without naming names, people continue to say, well, you must stop trying to wage war with Iran. Well, we're not trying to do it, and it seems that they're -- it looks as if somebody is coming to the defense of somebody who is not under siege; that's what I meant.

Q But you're putting it out there, that some politicians are trying to protect Iran. Surely you have --

MR. SNOW: I think I said "it seems," and I left it in general.

Q Who does it seem that's trying to protect Iran?

MR. SNOW: Well, again, the one thing I'm doing is I'm responding to a general trend of argument rather than trying to pick fights.

Q But are there individuals that you have in mind?

MR. SNOW: Again, Victoria, I told you, I'm responding to particular arguments and I --

Q But, Tony, couldn't that concern be about the United States, about deploying U.S. forces to a potential conflict with Iran, and not in the interest of protecting Iran?

MR. SNOW: Well, perhaps, but I don't -- what's been interesting to us about the persistence of these stories is that the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Press Secretary, on, probably approaching a dozen occasions right now, made it clear that our approach with Iran is comprehensive and diplomatic. And we've said it over and over, and people --

Q Why doesn't anybody believe you? (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: Well, it's a good question why people have -- it's just been an interesting tactic, in terms of trying to create a sense of aggression on the part of this administration that is not only unwarranted, but unwelcome in terms of trying to do diplomatically what we think ought to be done with Iran.

And so the point here is, why try to whoop up suspicion and skepticism about an administration right after we've demonstrated the success of diplomacy in North Korea using the same means and methods that we're trying to employ with the Iranians, when it is our clear commitment to pursue a diplomatic course and a diplomatic path toward a nation with whom in the past we have had very warm relations, and its people we support. And, therefore, it just strikes as curious why people persist in trying to stoke up rumors about something that simply isn't true.

Q One more, please. Can you confirm that Karl Rove received a copy of the Iranian proposal for negotiation sometime in early May, 2003?

MR. SNOW: I absolutely cannot. I know nothing about it.

Q Are you sure you know nothing about it?

MR. SNOW: I am sure that I know nothing about it. I will try to find out --

Q Can you find out about it?

MR. SNOW: I will try to find out.

Q Thank you.

MR. SNOW: Apparently you think you know something about it -- (laughter) --

Q I do.

MR. SNOW: -- so we'll try to see what we can. All right.

Q Thank you, Tony. I have one question with three parts. The Associated Press --

MR. SNOW: For the record, note that groans have just filled the room. Proceed. (Laughter.)

Q Thank you. The Associated Press reported from Orangeburg, South Carolina yesterday that Hillary Clinton announced that the confederate flag should be removed from the war memorial in Columbia's Statehouse grounds. And my question, does the President agree or disagree with this Hillary request?

MR. SNOW: The President is not going to get involved as pundit-in-chief in political campaigns.

Q Does the President believe that Mississippi's state flag needs to be changed because it has the confederate battle flag and that the 15-star replica of the Star Spangled Banner, now flying at Fort McHenry, should be removed because it was the flag of a slave nation?

MR. SNOW: My goodness, Les; it hasn't come up.

Q Well, I'm just raising it right now, and how does the President stand?

MR. SNOW: Thank you. Thank you. Believe it or not, I don't have an answer for you on that. Continue, though.

Q Okay, last one. The name of George Washington -- President Lincoln in 1842 said that, "The name of George Washington is the mightiest name on earth -- long since the mightiest in the cause of civil liberty; still the mightiest in moral reformation." You're familiar with that statement?

MR. SNOW: No, but I'll take it at --

Q Does the President believe President Lincoln was wrong in saying this because President Washington owned slaves?

MR. SNOW: Oh my goodness, Les. That's -- (laughter.)

Q You'd rather duck this, okay.

MR. SNOW: Paula, help me out. I go to Paula for help. (Laughter.) Go ahead. Paula asks good, tough questions. I like them. Go ahead.

Q I have a question on Walter Reed outpatient care, and it's related to part of the report. It said --

MR. SNOW: I don't -- Paula, I can't help you with an individual patient.

Q No, it's not individual patient. There appears to be a pattern that physicians are determining that some of the war-related injuries, particularly related to mental health and head trauma, are pre-existing conditions. And is that going to be looked into, particularly --

MR. SNOW: I'll try to find out. Again, when it comes to things like this, I know -- it is not a dodge, it is the responsible way to do this, which is, the Army has to take a look at what's going on at Walter Reed. And the Army and the Pentagon will give you detailed responses, not only to charges, but to procedural matters. I'm just not in a position to do that for you right now.

Q Tony, were reports yesterday correct that the al Qaeda leadership has, to at least some extent, reasserted its command and control ability?

MR. SNOW: Well, I think it's been pretty clear that al Qaeda, certainly, has tried to become more active in Afghanistan. That we saw last year in the offensive, and read out much of it from here on the podium. And it's also clear -- look, you've got an enemy like al Qaeda that's committed to trying to figure out some way to wage war against the United States and against civilized states. They have been badly disorganized, but it is also clear that they are determined people who are going to try to reorganize. And we're every bit determined to continue to chase them down and make a difference.

Q Okay, but that doesn't answer -- have they, in fact, reorganized to the extent that the leadership now has much more effective command and control over --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to -- I've given you a general answer because I'm not going to get into specific matters of intelligence from the podium.

Q Okay. Does the President still believe that al Qaeda leadership is on the run?

MR. SNOW: Depends. For instance, you take a look at Anbar province, absolutely. You take a look at different parts around the world, they have certainly been struck by significant military action. But on the other hand, to treat -- al Qaeda is not a place that has a big, shiny, glass and steel headquarters where you can measure the activities on a daily basis, and they certainly don't put out sheets for their shareholders. Instead, what you have is an organization that is amorphous and that tends to move around, and tends to rise and fall in different areas.

Let me put it this way: It is a significant terror threat, we're aware of it. And it's one of the reasons why the President, early on, began trying to put together tools that not only were going to enable him to fight al Qaeda, but future Presidents to fight al Qaeda. The terrorist surveillance program, the Patriot Act, the SWIFT program, all of those have been made -- certainly one of them was voted on Congress, the other two have been made known publicly, and continues to do on a multiplicity of fronts what is necessary to try to confront the challenge.

Q So they may be on the run in some areas, but not in others, is that what you're saying?

MR. SNOW: There are some areas where they have safe haven, and you've got to try to deny them that safe haven

Q Lastly, is there more danger now, given their -- of a terrorist attack, given what they've tried to do?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. Again -- and that's not the kind of thing that I think would be appropriate for me to try to render.

Q Tony, in the wake of what's happening at Walter Reed, what lengths has the administration gone to, to prevent another Vietnam scenario? Because many have made comments about, you know, this could wind up being another Vietnam, and, indeed, we're in the situation where many of the troops are not being taken care of properly.

MR. SNOW: Well, wait a minute. First, April, there are thousands and thousands who, in fact, have been cared for. The assumption that somehow everybody has gone through and not received appropriate care simply isn't the case. It is important to make sure that everybody gets -- resort to treatment. To try to whomp this up -- to try to come up with a Vietnam analogy is just --

Q I'm not trying to come up, that analogy has been floating out there for a while. And that's the question that I'm asking you, to what lengths is this administration going to, to prevent that kind of scenario?

MR. SNOW: Look, what the administration is going to do -- and this, again, you need to talk to the people who are in the line of authority here -- is to fix the problem. The one thing we're not going to do is to run from a problem or deny it exists. We're going to try to figure out what the dimensions of the problem are, and how to fix it. And that's something that I'm sure members of both Houses of Congress will be happy to do if it requires additional attention.

Q Tony, when the President -- back on the Iran line of questioning, when the President spoke at length on Wednesday about the Quds forces operating inside Iraq, that did create quite a stir around the world, considering the language he used. Can we assume that that's one of those things that's not on a diplomatic track?

MR. SNOW: Again, we've already said that the matter of the Quds forces or those who are trying to import weaponry or materiel into Iraq is something that's a force protection issue inside Iraq, and that's how we treat it. There have been members of the Quds forces who have apprehended within Iraq, and there have been arms caches that have been discovered, and we continue to do everything we can to interdict and to save American lives and the lives of innocents. But it is not, as I said last week, it's not a casus belli. Instead, it is a matter of force protection, and that's exactly how we view it.

Q The President is off to energy and health care events this week, two of the areas he has mentioned as possible cooperation with the Democrats. Any progress you can tell us about those areas or any --

MR. SNOW: No, but the conversations we've had have been very productive. I've just -- at this point, you need to let the legislative process work it out -- work itself out a bit. But there have been continuing and regular contacts with Democrats and Republicans on all four of the action items that the President mentioned in the State of the Union address -- energy, education, health care, and immigration -- and we've been encouraged.

But on the other hand, we know that there are going to be political differences on some of the issues. I think there's a lot of good will within Congress, in trying to address these matters.

Q Tony, yesterday chief executives of P.G. County and Montgomery County were speaking at a function in Maryland, and what they both were saying, Mr. Jack Johnson and Ike Leggett, that as far as Black History Month is concerned, and civil rights and other fundamental rights for (inaudible), President Bush has done great, but there's more to do. And also they are supporting the D.C. voting rights. What the President has to do more, as far as civil rights or fundamental rights (inaudible) -- Martin Luther King and Black History Month?

MR. SNOW: Goyal, the President believes in advancing civil rights, not only in terms of legal protections, which he has certainly pursued, including with re-upping the Voting Rights Act, but also the best way to advance the cause of civil rights is to make sure that everybody has an equal opportunity to share in the American Dream, and that there are no legal barriers, and also that the ladder of opportunity is extended in such a way that everybody has access to a first-rate education, that everybody has access to health care, that everybody has access to work, and that you address a lot of the issues that have led to persistent poverty and hopelessness in certain parts of our country.

Q Thank you.

END 12:42 P.M. EST

* The President first learned of the troubling allegations regarding Walter Reed from the stories this weekend in the Washington Post. He is deeply concerned and wants any problems identified and fixed.

For Immediate Release, February 20, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and , or , and , or and or and or and or and or , or , or ,

Secretary Rice Remarks, Abbas, Olmert 02/19/07

David Citadel Hotel, Jerusalem, February 19, 2007, Secretary Rice gives remarks after her meeting with President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert, at the David Citadel Hotel, Jerusalem. Photo credit:  Matty Stern/U.S. Embassy, Tel AvivGood afternoon. Palestinian President Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and I met today here in Jerusalem. It was a useful and productive meeting.
All three of us affirmed our commitment to a two-state solution, agreed that a Palestinian state cannot be born of violence and terror, and reiterated our acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the Roadmap.

The President and the Prime Minister discussed how to move forward on mutual obligations in the Roadmap in regard to the implementation of Phase I.

We called for respecting the ceasefire declared in November.

The President and the Prime Minister also discussed issues arising from the agreement for the formation of a Palestinian national unity government, and the position of the Quartet that any Palestinian Authority government must be committed to non-violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including regarding the Roadmap.

The President and the Prime Minister discussed their views of the diplomatic and political horizon and how it might unfold toward the two state vision of President Bush.

The President and the Prime Minister agreed that they would meet together again soon. They reiterated their desire for American participation and leadership in facilitating efforts to overcome obstacles, rally regional and international support, and move forward toward peace.

In that vein, I expect to return to the region soon.

2007/T3-8, Released on February 19, 2007

Travel to Iraq, Jerusalem and the Palestinian Territories, Amman, and Berlin

Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Jerusalem, February 19, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and

Condoleezza Rice, Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas

David Citadel Hotel, Jerusalem. February 19, 2007, Secretary Rice, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at their trilateral meeting at the David Citadel Hotel, Jerusalem.  Photo credit:  Matty Stern/U.S. Embassy, Tel AvivU.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met today, February 19. It was a useful and productive meeting.
The leaders affirmed their commitment to a two-state solution, agreed that a Palestinian state cannot be born of violence and terror, and reiterated their acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the Roadmap.

The President and the Prime Minister discussed how to move forward on mutual obligations in the Roadmap in regard to the implementation of Phase I.

The participants called for respecting the ceasefire declared in November.

The President and the Prime Minister also discussed issues arising from the agreement for a Palestinian national unity government, and the position of the Quartet that any Palestinian Authority government must be committed to non-violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including regarding the Roadmap.

The President and the Prime Minister discussed their views of the diplomatic and political horizon and how it might unfold toward the two state vision of President Bush.

The President and the Prime Minister agreed that they would meet together again soon. They reiterated their desire for American participation and leadership in facilitating efforts to overcome obstacles, rally regional and international support, and move forward toward peace.

In that vein, Secretary Rice expects to return soon.

2007/T3-9, Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Jerusalem, February 19, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and

Monday, February 19, 2007

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton

Official Site of Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee
Barack Obama.and Hillary Clinton: A tale of two candidates. Overheard in Manhattan NYC

Speaker one (old minority male conservative baitingly), i hear Obama went to a "madrasah school"

Speaker two (young white female liberal with glee), he's toast.

Speaker one (in wonder), but Hillary you'd vote for if she had sex with the devil?

Speaker two (with gusto), yes!
Official Site of Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee - Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President Exploratory Committee.

Official Website of Barack Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign - Powered by Obama '08 (and supporters just like you

Technorati Tags: and

Rudy Giuliani on Larry King VIDEO

Rudy Giuliani on Larry King VIDEO and TEXT Transcript


Are you running or not?

GIULIANI: Yes, I'm running. Sure.

KING: Oh, you are.

Have you -- when would you -- do you make an official announcement or is this it -- here, right now?

GIULIANI: I guess you do...

KING: You just said, "I'm running." GIULIANI: I guess you do one of these things where you do it four times or five times in a day so that I can, you know, get on your show and about five others.

KING: So you're running?

GIULIANI: Yes, I'm running.

KING: Final -- what led to the decision?

GIULIANI: I think I can make a difference. I believe that the country needs leadership. I think that we're going through a war on terror -- or a terrorist war against us, which maybe is a better way to describe it. We've got lots of problems that we have to tackle and resolve. We need fiscal discipline. We need better education. We need energy independence. There's so many things that we haven't sort of tackled.

I mean one of the things I do is...

KING: Tackle things.

GIULIANI: Tackle things, yes. Lead. Try to get things done. Try to improve...

KING: It takes a lot of chutzpah, though, doesn't it, to say...

GIULIANI: Yes.

KING: ... I'm the best?

That's what you're saying.

GIULIANI: Yes, it does. And very humbling. And it takes a long time to come to a conclusion that with all your imperfections and all the things, you know, that we all are, none of us -- none of us do everything well and none of us are perfect. You have to say to yourself is this something that I can do?

And for a kid from Brooklyn, sometimes you wake up in the morning and say gee...

KING: Is this really --

GIULIANI: ... is this really happening?

And then sometimes you wake up and say I can do this. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

KING: Let's get to some issues.

A leading industrialist, a friend of mine, said if the United States were a corporation, based on the Iraq War, everyone at the top would be fired.

How would you comment on that? And that -- in other words meaning it ain't going right.

GIULIANI: Yes, but that would have been true -- he would have said the same thing about the Civil War and Abraham Lincoln would have been fired. And he might have said the same thing at the Battle of the Bulge and Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Marshall -- all would have been fired. And...

KING: So you're confident this is all going to turn around?

GIULIANI: Oh, no. No.

KING: Because those -- they turned around.

GIULIANI: No, no. I'm not confident it's all going to turn around.

Who knows that?

I mean, you never know that in the middle of a war. I'm confident that we have to try to make a turnaround, and we just can't walk out and that it is critical to us that things get to the point in Iraq that we have some degree of stability and not the way they are now. Because if we leave it the way it is now and we run out, then we're going to face further difficulties in the future. Then we're going to lose more lives in the future.

And I'll tell you who tells me that -- a lot of people that have been there. I was just in San Diego speaking to sailors and Marines that have been in Iraq. That's what they tell me. They tell me look, this is a volunteer army -- you want to take our advice? Our advice is give us a chance to try to stabilize that place, otherwise we know what's going to happen. Two years from now you're going to send us back because there's going to be a major war in this area.

KING: But what do you do to change it? Are 20,000 troops going to change it?

GIULIANI: I think you've got to change the whole strategy, which I hope they did. I mean I hope -- I hope -- the whole strategy has to be a strategy of not just pacifying places, but holding them, and holding them for some period of time.

It reminds me a little, on a much bigger scale, of what I had to do to reduce crime in New York City. We had to not just go into neighborhoods and make them safe -- which the city had been doing for years. But the city had been going in there, making them safe and then leaving -- and then going to another place, make that and leave. Another place -- make it safe, leave.

We've got to go, make it safe in the areas, the districts of Baghdad, and then stay there for a period of time and stabilize it and allow people to have their kids go to school. And we have -- you know, there was a real doubt as to whether we could do this, nation building?

KING: Yes.

When are we going to do it?

GIULIANI: Well, we weren't going to do it and we weren't sure we could do it, and this is a real hard thing to learn how to do. And it's very different than what the military used to have to do in the past -- or America.

But right now, if we don't do a better job of stabilizing Iraq -- and not just for the benefit of the Iraqi people, for the benefit of our people -- then we have -- then we have a country where Iran has got a major, major ability to expand their activities.

KING: Would you...

GIULIANI: Two Shiite countries right next to each other, slaughtering, you know, where one group, at least, is slaughtering Sunnis.

KING: Would you agree, Mr. Mayor, if they had to do this all over again, go back years, no one would vote for the Iraq War? A hundred to nothing, probably, in the Senate? No WMD --

GIULIANI: Yes, I guess...

KING: No?

GIULIANI: But I'm not sure that explains to us what's right about us. You know, the idea of taking out Saddam Hussein was one that was premised on the fact that he invaded Kuwait, that he used chemical weapons, that he had billions of dollars at his disposal, which he used to support various parts of this Islamic terrorist movement.

KING: You're not saying you'd do it again?

GIULIANI: I would remove Saddam Hussein again. I just hope we'd do it better and we'd do it in a different way.

KING: But what do you say to the...

GIULIANI: ... that we do the nation building part or the hand off to the Iraqis or the rebuilding of the Iraqis -- here are the things that I learned from it. Not -- take out Saddam Hussein in a second again. I think the world is much better off without Saddam Hussein than with him. And I think maybe some of the confusion doesn't lead us to really see that. Here's what I would change. Do it with more troops.

KING: Which was recommended and turned down.

GIULIANI: ... maybe 100,000, 150,000 more. I would do it in a way in which we didn't disband the army, which we've learned. This is all -- you know, this is all Monday morning quarterbacking, but you Monday morning quarterback in order to play the next game better, right? Monday morning quarterbacks who just want to criticize is cheap stuff. Monday morning quarterbacking so that next Saturday or Sunday you can play better is absolutely right.

I would -- I would have us not disband the army. You wouldn't de-Baathify. See, de-Baathify sounds like the right thing to do because you're getting rid of all the old Saddam guys. But that meant getting rid of the entire civil service. The country had no infrastructure.

KING: So are you -- are you -- who do you blame?

GIULIANI: So you learn from these things.

KING: Do you blame Rumsfeld?

GIULIANI: No, I don't blame anybody.

KING: You don't blame any -- somebody's got to...

GIULIANI: No, no, no. You don't do it that way.

KING: Nobody's to blame?

GIULIANI: You don't do it that way. That's why you don't make progress. Just like I don't blame people for not figuring out September 11 before it happened. What I do is, I kind of look at what happened, so you learn for the future.

KING: But there were mistakes.

GIULIANI: Of course there were mistakes. Lincoln made mistakes. Roosevelt made mistakes. Eisenhower made mistakes. The Battle of the Bulge was the biggest intelligence failure in American military history, much bigger than any in Vietnam or now. We didn't know that the Soviets were moving 400,000 or 500,000 troops. We missed it.

KING: Shouldn't they be blamed for not explaining it well enough?

GIULIANI: Learn from it. Learn from it. Don't blame them.

KING: How about the American public is so against it, have they done a bad job in explaining?

GIULIANI: Maybe, maybe, you know. Yes, maybe they didn't do that.

KING: Would you communicate better?

GIULIANI: I don't know. I hope -- I hope I would. I mean, you know, I hope -- I hope that I would learn from the mistakes that were made in this situation.

KING: Such as? GIULIANI: Just as the mistakes I made when I was mayor, I tried to learn from them. If I get to be president of the United States, I probably won't make the same mistakes, because I will have learned from them. I'll probably make different ones.

KING: Now how is...

GIULIANI: And then the next one will learn from the ones that I made. And I would say that about Bill Clinton or George Bush. This job is so difficult that you've got to have humility about it and you have to understand how to look at the past not in a way in which you cast blame, but you learn from it.

KING: The House is apparently about to vote -- and will vote, apparently -- to say that this 20,000 troops is a mistake.

Now, an important question, do you hold those who vote for that as helping the enemy?

GIULIANI: No, I hold them as...

KING: Because some say that.

GIULIANI: OK. There's a...

KING: You don't?

GIULIANI: I mean, there's -- you can look at the practical and common sense conclusion of it anyway you want. But there's something more important than that.

We have a right of free speech in this country and we elect people to make decisions.

Here's what I would prefer to see them do, though, if you ask me what's my view on that. The non-binding resolution thing gets me more than are you for it or against it. I have tremendous respect for the people who feel that we either made a mistake going to war, who voted against the war, who now have come to the conclusion, changed their minds -- they have every right to that -- that it's wrong. You should, in a dynamic situation, keep questioning.

What I don't like is the idea of a non-binding resolution.

KING: Because?

GIULIANI: Because there's no decision.

KING: But it's a -- making a -- it's a statement.

GIULIANI: Yes, but that's what you do. That's what Tim Russert does. That's what Rush Limbaugh does. That's what you guys do, you make comments. We pay them to make decisions, not just to make comments. We pay them to decide. The United States Congress does declarations, the war, that's the...

KING: So are you telling them if you feel that way, withhold funds, if that's the way you feel?

GIULIANI: Well, the ones I -- the ones that I think have a better understanding of what their responsibility is and are willing to take a risk are the ones who are saying we've got to hold back the funds, we've got to vote against the war or we're for the war.

KING: So...

GIULIANI: And maybe it's because I, you know, I ran a government and I tend to be a decisive person. I like decisions. And I think one of the things wrong with Washington is they don't want to make tough decisions anymore.

KING: You know, if you're...

GIULIANI: Non-binding resolution about Iraq; no decision on immigration; no decision on Social Security reform; no decision on what to do about energy independence; no decision. No decision.

You know why that happens?

Because it's unpopular. CNN LARRY KING LIVE, Interview With Rudy Giuliani and CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Technorati Tags: and or and or and or and or and

President's Day

Ruffles and Flourishes/Hail to the Chief mp3

President's Day, is a U.S. federal holiday, observed on the third Monday in February. Initially referred to as Washington's Birthday in 1880, it was restricted to government offices in Washington D.C. In 1885 the observence of Washington's Birthday was expanded to include all federal offices. As the first federal holiday to honor an American citizen, the holiday was celebrated on Washington's actual birthday, February 22. President's Day

A rose by any other name...there is some debate as to whether or not President Richard Nixon "proclaimed" or drafted an "executive order" regarding the day of observance for President's Day nee Washington's Birthday. Submitted for your approval, here are 2 resources on the subject:

From the U.S. Embassy in Stockholm
Until 1971, both February 12 and February 22 were observed as federal holidays to honor the birthdays of Abraham Lincoln (Feb. 12) and George Washington (Feb. 22).

"In 1971 President Richard Nixon proclaimed one single federal holiday, the Presidents' Day, to be observed on the third Monday of February, honoring all past presidents of the United States of America."

Please Note: The Federal statute designates this day as Washington's Birthday, President Nixon issued a proclamation declaring the holiday as "Presidents' Day" in 1971. President Nixon erroneously believed that a Presidential proclamation on the matter carried the same weight as an Executive Order. Since that change in 1971, the common term has been "Presidents' Day".

From The National Archives: Prologue - "By George IT IS Washington's Birthday!"
"President Richard Nixon did not, as a widely circulated Internet story claims, issue a proclamation changing the holiday's name from Washington's Birthday to Presidents' Day. His Executive Order 115 on February 10, 1971, announced the new federal holiday calendar, as passed by Congress in 1968. Nixon's executive order reminded citizens, as did many newspapers on January 1, of the new federal holiday calendar being implemented":
Protocol, Fanfare, Ceremonial Music for Persons of Distinction
History of Ruffles and Flourishes/Hail to the Chief

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Strain has major effect on high-temp superconductors

Strain has major effect on high-temp superconductors

Caption: Magneto-optical image of magnetic fields within a YBCO superconductor showing electrically connected grains (yellow) and grain boundaries (green) that form barriers to superconducting currents. The large reversible effect of strain observed by NIST might be due to associated changes in grain boundaries, which raise the barriers to current flow and lowering the material's current-carrying capability. Credit: D.C. van der Laan/NIST, Usage Restrictions: None.Just a little mechanical strain can cause a large drop in the maximum current carried by high-temperature superconductors, according to novel measurements carried out by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
The effect, which is reversible, adds a new dimension to designing superconducting systems—particularly for electric power applications—and it also provides a new tool that will help scientists probe the fundamental mechanism behind why these materials carry current with no resistance.

The measurements, reported in Applied Physics Letters,* revealed a 40 percent reduction in critical current, the point at which superconductivity breaks down, at just 1 percent compressive strain. This effect can be readily accommodated in the engineering design of practical applications, NIST project leader Jack Ekin says, but knowing about it ahead of time will be important to the success of many large-scale devices. The effect was measured in three types of yttrium-barium-copper-oxide (YBCO), a brittle ceramic considered the best prospect for making low-cost, high-current, superconducting wires. The researchers developed a “four point" bend technique that enables studies of superconducting properties over a wide range of uniform strain at high current levels. The superconductor is soldered on top of a flexible metal beam, which is then bent up or down at both ends while the critical current is measured.
The discovery is the first major reversible strain effect found in practical high-temperature superconductors, which generally have been tested under smaller tensile strains only, or at strains so high they caused the material to break down permanently. The newly discovered effect is totally reversible and symmetric for both compressive and tensile (pushing and pulling) strains, suggesting it is intrinsic to the fundamental mechanism of superconductivity in YBCO.
The NIST team is now pursuing the possibility of using the effect as a new tool for probing the elusive mechanism underlying high-temperature superconductivity. The next step is to investigate how magnetic fields affect the strain effect, and several collaborations are under way with universities and other research organizations to study the interplay of the effect with other factors affecting high-temperature superconductivity. The research described in the new paper was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy. ###

* D.C. van der Laan and J.W. Ekin. Large intrinsic effect of axial strain on the critical current of high-temperature superconductors for electric power applications. Applied Physics Letters, 90, 052506, 2006. Posted online Jan. 31.

Contact: Laura Ost laura.ost@nist.gov 303-497-4880 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Freedom Calendar 02/17/07 - 02/24/07

February 17, 1973, Republican Navy Secretary John Warner commissions frigate in honor of first African-American naval aviator, Jesse L. Brown, who died in combat during Korean War.

February 18, 1946, Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools.

February 19, 1976, President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII.

February 20, 1895, Death of Republican activist Frederick Douglass – escaped slave, author, abolition leader, civil rights champion.

Presidents’ Day, February 21, 1863, Republican Governor John Andrew establishes the 54th Massachusetts, the famous regiment of African-American U.S. troops in which two of Frederick Douglass’ sons served.

February 22, 1856, First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies.

February 23, 1990, President George H. W. Bush nominates African-American Republican Arthur Fletcher as Chairman of the U.S. Civil Service Commission.

February 24, 1992, President George H. W. Bush appoints African-American Edward Perkins as U.S. Ambassador to United Nations.

“The Republican Party, on the contrary [to the Democrats], holds that this government was instituted to secure the blessings of freedom, and that slavery is an unqualified evil… . [Republicans] will oppose in all its length and breadth the modern Democratic idea that slavery is as good as freedom.”

Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States

Technorati Tags: and or and or and or and or and or or and or

Presidential Podcast 02/17/07

Presidential Podcast 02/17/07 en Español. In Focus: Health Care, Click here to Subscribe to Our Republican National Convention Blog Podcast Channel with Odeo Subscribe to Our Odeo or Click here to Subscribe to Our Republican National Convention Blog Podcast Channel with Podnova podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring real audio and full text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned.

Technorati Tags: and or and or and or and or and

Bush radio address 02/17/07 full audio, text transcript

President George W. Bush calls troops from his ranch in Crawford, Texas, Thanksgiving Day, Thursday, Nov. 24, 2005. White House photo by Eric Draper.bush radio address 02/17/07 full audio, text transcript. PODCAST and, President's Radio Address en Español. In Focus: Health Care
Click here to Subscribe to Our Republican National Convention Blog Podcast Channel with Odeo Subscribe to Our Odeo or Click here to Subscribe to Republican National Convention Blog's PODCAST with podnova podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring real audio and full text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Today I would like to talk to you about an urgent priority for our Nation: confronting the rising costs of health care.

In my State of the Union Address, I invited Democrats and Republicans in Congress to work with my Administration to reform our health care system. In the past few weeks, I've discussed my health care proposals with citizens across our country. Next week, I'll visit a hospital in Tennessee to hear directly from people who do not have access to basic, affordable health insurance. I'll also meet with a panel of experts at the White House to discuss how we can build a vibrant market where individuals can buy their own health insurance.

The problem with our current system is clear: health care costs are rising rapidly, more than twice as fast as wages. These rising costs are driving up the price of health insurance and making it harder for working families to afford coverage. These rising costs also make it harder for small businesses to offer health coverage to their employees. We must address these rising costs so that more Americans can afford basic private health insurance.

One of the most promising ways to make private coverage more affordable and accessible is to reform the tax code. Today, the tax code unfairly penalizes people who do not get health insurance through their job. If you buy health insurance on your own, you pay much more after taxes than if you get it through your job. I proposed to end this unfair bias in the tax code by creating a standard tax deduction for every American who has health insurance, whether they get it through their job or on their own.

For example, every family that has health insurance would get a $15,000 deduction on their taxes. This deduction would also apply to payroll taxes, so that even those who pay no income taxes would benefit. Americans deserve a level playing field. If you're self-employed, a farmer, a rancher, or an employee at a small business who buys health insurance on your own, you should get the same tax advantage as those who get their health insurance through their job at a big business.

At the same time, I proposed "Affordable Choices" grants to help states provide coverage for the uninsured. Governors across our country have put forward innovative ideas for health care reform. Under my proposal, states that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens would receive Federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. Next week, the Nation's governors will come to Washington to discuss challenges facing their states. I've asked my Secretary of Health and Human Services, Mike Leavitt, to meet with the governors and discuss ways we can work together to help reduce the number of uninsured Americans.

Reforming health care is a bipartisan priority. Earlier this week, I was pleased to receive a letter from 10 senators -- five Democrats and five Republicans -- who expressed their desire to work together on health care reform. I look forward to discussing our proposals and hearing more about their ideas. I appreciate the commitment of this bipartisan group to work with my Administration, and I will continue to reach across party lines to enact common-sense health care reforms.

From my conversations with Democrats and Republicans, it is clear both parties recognize that strengthening health care for all Americans is one of our most important responsibilities. I am confident that if we put politics aside, we can find practical ways to improve our private health care system, and help millions of Americans enjoy better care, new choices, and healthier lives.

Thank you for listening.

END, For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, February 17, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and or and or and or and

Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación 02/17/07

Presidente George W. Bush llama a tropas de su rancho en Crawford, Tejas, día de Thanksgiving, jueves, de noviembre el 24 de 2005.  Foto blanca de la casa de Eric Draper.forre el audio de la dirección de radio 02/17/07 por completo, transcripción del texto. (nota de los redactores: ninguna lengua española mp3 lanzó esta semana, apesadumbrada) PODCAST

Discurso Radial del Presidente. en Español
Chascar aquí para suscribir a nuestro canal republicano de Blog Podcast de la convención nacional con Odeo Suscribir a nuestro canal de Podcast de Odeo o del podnova Chascar aquí para suscribir a nuestro canal republicano de Blog Podcast de la convención nacional con Podnova y recibir la dirección de radio presidencial semanal en inglés y español con informes selectos del departamento del estado. Ofreciendo transcripciones audio y con texto completo verdaderas, más fuentes contentas agregaron a menudo así que la estancia templó.

Buenos Días. Hoy quisiera hablarles sobre una prioridad urgente para nuestra Nación - la de enfrentar los costos crecientes del cuidado de la salud.

En mi discurso sobre el Estado de la Nación invité a los Demócratas y los Republicanos en el Congreso a trabajar con mi administración para reformar el sistema de cuidado de la salud. En las últimas semanas, he discutido mis propuestas para el cuidado de la salud con ciudadanos en todo el país. La próxima semana visitaré un hospital en Tennessee para escuchar directamente de las personas que no tienen acceso a un cuidado de la salud básico y económico. También me reuniré con un panel de expertos en la Casa Blanca para discutir cómo podemos crear un mercado vibrante donde las personas puedan comprar su propio seguro de salud.

El problema con nuestro sistema actual es evidente: Los costos de la atención médica están subiendo rápidamente - más de dos veces más rápido que los salarios. Estos costos crecientes están haciendo subir el precio del seguro de la salud, y haciendo más difícil para que las familias que trabajan puedan pagar la cobertura. Estos costos crecientes también hacen más difícil que las pequeñas empresas puedan ofrecer cobertura de salud a sus empleados. Debemos enfrentar estos costos crecientes, de modo que más estadounidenses puedan pagar por seguro de salud básico privado.

Una de las maneras más prometedoras para que la cobertura privada sea más económica y asequible es reformando el código tributario. Hoy en día el código tributario injustamente sanciona a las personas que no obtienen seguro de salud a través de sus empleos. Si usted compra seguro de salud por su cuenta, paga mucho más, después de impuestos, que si lo obtuviera a través de su empleo. Yo he propuesto terminar con esta predisposición injusta en el código tributario mediante la creación de una deducción estándar en los impuestos para cada estadounidense que tenga seguro de salud - ya sea que lo obtenga por medio de su empleo o por su cuenta. Por ejemplo, cada familia que tenga seguro de salud recibiría una deducción de 15,000 dólares en sus impuestos. Esta deducción también se aplicaría a impuestos por nómina, de modo que hasta los que no pagan impuestos sobre los ingresos tendrían beneficio. Los estadounidenses merecen igualdad de condiciones. Si usted es empleado por cuenta propia, agricultor, ranchero, o empleado en un pequeño negocio, usted debería recibir la misma ventaja tributaria como aquellos que obtienen su seguro de salud a través de su empleo en un negocio grande.

Al mismo tiempo, he propuesto subvenciones para "Opciones Económicas" para ayudar a los estados a ofrecer cobertura para los que no tienen seguro. Los gobernadores en todo el país han propuesto ideas innovadoras para la reforma del cuidado de la salud. Bajo mi propuesta, los estados que pongan el seguro de salud básico privado a disposición de todos sus ciudadanos recibirían fondos federales para ayudarles a proporcionar cobertura a los pobres y a los enfermos. La próxima semana, los gobernadores de la Nación vendrán a Washington a discutir desafíos que enfrentan sus estados. Le he pedido a mi Secretario de Salud y Servicios Humanos - Mike Leavitt - que se reúna con los gobernadores para discutir maneras en que podamos trabajar juntos para ayudar a reducir el número de estadounidenses sin seguro.

Reformar el cuidado de la salud es una prioridad bipartita. A principios de esta semana me dio gusto recibir una carta de 10 senadores - cinco Demócratas y cinco Republicanos - quienes expresaron su deseo de trabajar juntos sobre la reforma del cuidado de la salud. Espero discutir sus propuestas y escuchar más sobre sus ideas. Agradezco el compromiso de este grupo bipartito de trabajar con mi Administración - y seguiré cruzando líneas partidarias a fin de aprobar reformas del cuidado de la salud que tengan sentido común.

En base a mis conversaciones con Demócratas y Republicanos, está claro que ambos partidos reconocen que una de nuestras responsabilidades más importantes es fortalecer el cuidado de la salud para todos los estadounidenses. Confío que si ponemos la política a un lado, podemos encontrar maneras prácticas para mejorar nuestro sistema de cuidado de la salud privado - y ayudar a millones de estadounidenses a disfrutar de mejor atención, nuevas opciones y vidas más saludables.

Gracias por escuchar.

### Para su publicación inmediata, Oficina del Secretario de Prensa, 17 de febrero de 2007

Etiquetas De Technorati: , y , o y , o , o y o

Join The 101st Fighting Keyboardists

Friday, February 16, 2007

Secretary Rice To Ottawa

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, Feb. 16, 2007, before the House Appropriations State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs subcommittee. (AP Photo/Dennis Cook)Secretary Rice To Ottawa To Attend Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America Meeting

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will travel to Ottawa, Canada, February 23, 2007, to attend a meeting on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
Secretary Rice, Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, will meet with their Canadian and Mexican counterparts to discuss how the three democracies are working together to ensure continued prosperity and how we can provide greater security for all of North America.

2007/116, Released on February 16, 2007

Press Statement, Sean McCormack, Spokesman, Washington, DC. February 16, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and

Sudan Assessment Mission Denied Visas

Human Rights Council: Sudan Assessment Mission Denied Visas

The United States is deeply disappointed that the Government of Sudan has publicly announced it will not grant visas for the UN Human Rights Council's Assessment Mission to carry out an impartial review of the situation on the ground in Darfur. The United States calls on the Government of Sudan to grant the entire team entry into Sudan to carry out the mandate approved by the Human Rights Council.

We support UN Secretary-General Ban's call for the Government of Sudan to grant the assessment mission visas and urge it to live-up to its commitments to resolve the crisis in Darfur.

This mission was created by the Human Rights Council at its December 2006 Special Session on Darfur - called for by 63 countries from around the world because of strong concerns about ongoing human rights atrocities in Darfur.

The members of the mission represent all regions of the world, chosen by the President of the Human Rights Council on the basis of Council-member recommendations.

The mission has decided to continue to collect relevant information before completing its assessment and returning to Geneva on February 21, as scheduled.

2007/115, Released on February 16, 2007, Press Statement, Sean McCormack, Spokesman, Washington, DC. February 16, 2007

CIA Map of SudanMilitary regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956. Sudan was embroiled in two prolonged civil wars during most of the remainder of the 20th century.
These conflicts were rooted in northern economic, political, and social domination of largely non-Muslim, non-Arab southern Sudanese. The first civil war ended in 1972, but broke out again in 1983. The second war and famine-related effects resulted in more than 4 million people displaced and, according to rebel estimates, more than 2 million deaths over a period of two decades. Peace talks gained momentum in 2002-04 with the signing of several accords; a final Naivasha peace treaty of January 2005 granted the southern rebels autonomy for six years, after which a referendum for independence is scheduled to be held.

A separate conflict that broke out in the western region of Darfur in 2003 has resulted in at least 200,000 deaths and nearly 2 million displaced; as of late 2005, peacekeeping troops were struggling to stabilize the situation. Sudan also has faced large refugee influxes from neighboring countries, primarily Ethiopia and Chad, and armed conflict, poor transport infrastructure, and lack of government support have chronically obstructed the provision of humanitarian assistance to affected populations. CIA Factbook Sudan

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and

U.S. Signs Open Skies Aviation Agreement with Liberia

U.S. Signs Open Skies Aviation Agreement with Liberia

The United States and Liberia have signed a comprehensive Open Skies framework to expand and liberalize their bilateral civil aviation relations. U.S. Ambassador to Liberia Donald E. Booth and Director General of the Liberia Civil Aviation Authority, Richelieu A. Williams signed the agreement on February 15 at the Liberia Private Sector Investment Forum sponsored by The Corporate Council on Africa.

The agreement was reached after January 2007 talks between a Liberian delegation, led by Liberia Civil Aviation Authority Director General Richelieu Williams, and a U.S. delegation chaired by State's Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs that included officials from the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Commerce.

President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf is visiting the United States, and has met with President Bush and Secretary Rice to discuss a broad range of bilateral issues, focusing in large part on Liberia's economic development. The Open Skies agreement is one part of a substantial package of economic cooperation initiatives with Liberia announced during President Johnson-Sirleaf's visit. We are pleased to have reached this important agreement, which, as Secretary Rice remarked, "will deepen the connection between our people our businesses, and our economies."

The agreement with Liberia will significantly modernize U.S.-Liberia aviation relations by allowing airlines from the two countries to make commercial decisions with minimal government intervention. It will provide for open routes, capacity, frequencies, designations, and pricing, as well as cooperative marketing arrangements, including code-sharing.

The United States has concluded Open Skies agreements with more than 75 countries and territories.

Questions concerning this agreement may be directed to Mr. Joel Reifman, Deputy Director, Office of Aviation Negotiations, U.S. Department of State, phone: 202-647-9797.

2007/114, Released on February 16, 2007, Media Note, Office of the Spokesman, Washington, DC. February 16, 2007

CIA Map of LiberiaSettlement of freed slaves from the US in what is today Liberia began in 1822; by 1847, the Americo-Liberians were able to establish a republic. William TUBMAN, president from 1944-71, did much to promote foreign investment and to bridge the economic, social, and political gaps between the descendents of the original settlers and the inhabitants of the interior.
In 1980, a military coup led by Samuel DOE ushered in a decade of authoritarian rule. In December 1989, Charles TAYLOR launched a rebellion against DOE's regime that led to a prolonged civil war in which DOE himself was killed. A period of relative peace in 1997 allowed for elections that brought TAYLOR to power, but major fighting resumed in 2000.

An August 2003, peace agreement ended the war and prompted the resignation of former president Charles TAYLOR, who was exiled to Nigeria. After two years of rule by a transitional government, democratic elections in late 2005 brought President Ellen JOHNSON SIRLEAF to power. The UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), which maintains a strong presence throughout the country, completed a disarmament program for former combatants in late 2004, but the security situation is still volatile and the process of rebuilding the social and economic structure of this war-torn country remains sluggish. CIA Factbook Liberia

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or and or

Morocco: Visit of Moroccan Delegation

Morocco: Visit of Moroccan Delegation.

Question: Any comment about the Moroccan delegation meetings with U.S. officials this week?

Answer: Any comment about the Moroccan delegation meetings with U.S. officials this week? On February 12, Under Secretary Burns met a senior Moroccan inter-ministerial delegation to discuss Morocco's efforts to craft a credible proposal to help settle the Western Sahara issue.

Under Secretary Burns thanked the Moroccan delegation for visiting Washington and for presenting their ideas, which he called promising, and commended Morocco's efforts to find a realistic and workable solution to the Western Sahara problem. He urged the Government of Morocco to complete its drafting and consultation process on schedule. The United States appreciates the planning undertaken by the Government of Morocco on this important issue.

2007/111, Released on February 15, 2007

Taken Question Office of the Spokesman, Washington, DC. February 15, 2007 Question Taken at the February 15 Daily Press Briefing

CIA Map of MoroccoIn 788, about a century after the Arab conquest of North Africa, successive Moorish dynasties began to rule in Morocco. In the 16th century, the Sa'adi monarchy, particularly under Ahmad AL-MANSUR (1578-1603), repelled foreign invaders and inaugurated a golden age. In 1860,
Spain occupied northern Morocco and ushered in a half century of trade rivalry among European powers that saw Morocco's sovereignty steadily erode; in 1912, the French imposed a protectorate over the country. A protracted independence struggle with France ended successfully in 1956. The internationalized city of Tangier and most Spanish possessions were turned over to the new country that same year.

Morocco virtually annexed Western Sahara during the late 1970s, but final resolution on the status of the territory remains unresolved. Gradual political reforms in the 1990s resulted in the establishment of a bicameral legislature, which first met in 1997. Lower house elections were last held held in September 2002 and upper house elections were last held in September 2006. CIA Factbook Morocco

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Robert Gates, Peter Pace, 02/15/07 VIDEO

GATES ROUNDTABLE - Secretary of Defense Robert Gates answers questions during a press briefing Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007. Defense Dept. image.
Pentagon Roundtable
- FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Peter Pace speak with reporters at the Pentagon during a media roundtable.
GATES ROUNDTABLE - Secretary of Defense Robert Gates answers questions during a press briefing Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007. Defense Dept. image High Resolution Image

Technorati Tags: and or and or and or and or and

Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

Russia/Withdrawal from INF Treaty (Taken Question)

Question: Have the Russians notified us that they are withdrawing from the INF treaty? Have they told us of their intention to do so?

Answer: We have heard reports like this from various Russian sources in the past. We have not heard anything officially from the Russian government to suggest that it will withdraw from the INF Treaty.

2007/109, Released on February 15, 2007

INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) Treaty

Taken Question, Office of the Spokesman, Washington, DC. February 15, 2007

Technorati Tags: and or and , or and or