White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 12/19/07 VIDEO PODCAST

Press Briefing by Dana Perino, FULL STREAMING VIDEO, White House Conference Center Briefing Room, PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE MP3, Dana M. Perino Biography, 12:31 P.M. EDT.

MS. PERINO: Hello. I have an update for you on the fire. Today, at 9:15 a.m., the D.C. Fire Department received a call about smoke in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building -- that's also known as the EEOB. Firefighters arrived and found that the second floor through the fifth floor of the EEOB was fairly filled with smoke. They located an area on the second floor of the EEOB. Initial reports is that it appears to be an electrical room, a closet -- or a telephone bank, they're not quite sure and we'll get more information from the U.S. Secret Service and D.C. firefighters later, I'm sure. But they do believe that that area is the origin of the fire.

President George W. Bush thanks firefighters from the District of Columbia after they battled an early morning blaze Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2007, at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House complex. White House photo by Chris Greenberg Vice President Dick Cheney shakes hands with Washington, D.C. firefighters as he and President George W. Bush thanked the men for their efforts Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2007, in battling a morning blaze in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. White House photo by Shealah Craighead The Vice President's Ceremonial Office shown after a fire erupted Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2007, in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. White House photo by Chris Greenberg

They were able to identify, isolate and pull out the fire within -- put out the fire within 30 minutes. The Vice President's Ceremonial Office received smoke and water damage, but there is no fire damage. The D.C. Fire Department is working at the direction of the Secret Service to determine the cause. As you know, over 1,000 employees work in this building; fortunately, everyone was evacuated safely -- except for one individual suffered a minor injury, some cuts to his hand, and he is being treated at the White House Medical Unit right now. White House Management has suggested that all staff members that work in the EEOB go home for the remainder of the day, as the smoke and the situation is just such that they can't work there productively today. And the President and Mrs. Bush and the Vice President really appreciate all the work that the D.C. firefighters did, and the Secret Service, to make sure that all the White House employees are safe. We don't know the extent of the damage, but they said everyone was safe and property can be replaced or repaired. Q Will they be able to occupy the building tomorrow -- by tomorrow, do you know? MS. PERINO: I certainly think some office will be -- and I think that they just need to do an assessment to find out how much water damage there is, because given that the fire was on the second floor, water damage can flow downwards. And so they're going to need some time to be able to go into the building and find out how bad it is. Q And where was the fire located? Where was it centered? MS. PERINO: As I said, it was on the second floor, on this side of the building. But they're still trying to determine -- it appears that it could have been an electrical room or a telephone bank. It was to -- if you're looking at the Vice President's Ceremonial Office from this angle, it would have been to your left.

Q Was there anything of historical significance damaged in the --

MS. PERINO: That room is certainly gorgeous, and it has a lot of historic artifacts in there, and it's got a gorgeous floor, wood floor that is currently under water. So it's going to -- they're going to have to take some care in order to repair that. But they don't know the extent of the damage yet.

Q Was it a staff member who hurt his hand? And do you know whose offices were the ones where the flames were seen?

MS. PERINO: No, I don't know whose offices they were. A staff member -- yes, it was one of the -- a member of the military.

Q It was -- it was a staff member, not a member of the fire crews or anything.

MS. PERINO: Oh, correct, right. That's correct.

Q Where was the Vice President?

MS. PERINO: The President and the Vice President were both in the West Wing at the time, and the President learned about it from staff -- he was in the Oval Office at the time when he learned about it.

Q Dana, can you tell us why you decided to put out this statement this morning about The New York Times story? Why did you feel compelled to respond?

MS. PERINO: Well, the subhead of the newspaper indicated that the White House -- well, it says the White House role was wider than it said, implying that I had either changed my story, or I or somebody else at the White House had misled the public. And that is not true. And I heard now from The New York Times that they will retract that headline, and they are going to run a correction tomorrow.

Q But the underlying facts, four White House lawyers who are named knew about the destruction or the intent to destroy the tapes beforehand. Are you disputing that?

MS. PERINO: I have not commented on that -- and when we are in that --

Q (Inaudible.)

MS. PERINO: Helen, I'm going to finish this answer. The White House has not commented on anybody's involvement or knowledge, save for me telling everybody that the President had no recollection of being briefed on the existence or the destruction of the tapes before he was briefed by General Hayden. After that, I did not comment on anybody's knowledge or involvement. So if somebody has information that contradicts the one thing that I've said, then this would be true -- but it's not. And that is why I asked for a correction and The New York Times is going to correct it.

Q So you're disputing the characterization in that --

MS. PERINO: Absolutely, it's wrong.

Q -- not the underlying facts of the story.

MS. PERINO: I'm not commenting on the underlying facts of the story. I'm sticking with what I have done in the past, which is that --

Q (Inaudible.)

MS. PERINO: Well, there is a --

Q (Inaudible) -- it was back before (inaudible) was involved and The New York Times has information saying that they were involved. Isn't that wider than you were saying? You're only saying, well, the President had no involvement -- therefore, you're saying that, you know --

MS. PERINO: If you want to defend The New York Times, then you might look at it that way. I'm looking at it from anybody White House --

Q It does seem like it's not that --

MS. PERINO: I think anyone -- and believe me, the people that I've talked to, the reading of it -- when I first looked at it, I felt that that was saying that I had misled the American public on this, and I have not. There is nothing I have said that has been contradictory. And there is a preliminary inquiry being led by Attorney General Mukasey and General Hayden, and it is appropriate to let that play out.

Under our Constitution the press is free to speculate as much as they want, and they can report on as many former administration officials or unnamed current officials that they want to, that contradict each other throughout this story. I'm not allowed to do that. I am an employee of the federal government. I respect the request from the White House Counsel's Office that we not comment from this podium, and I have not. And for someone to imply that I had is offensive.

Q Well, you're the one (inaudible) implication. You're the one who said --

Q You're the one who's drawing the implication. Would you have been happy if the subhead had read, "White House role was lighter than previously understood"?

MS. PERINO: I have not -- what it says is that I had changed my story, and I have not.

Q It doesn't say that.

MS. PERINO: It -- that's how I took it, and I am not --

Q It does not say --

MS. PERINO: -- the only one.

Q It simply says that the White House does not comment on this, then it goes on to --

MS. PERINO: That is not -- that's not what it says in its headline, Bill. And there was editorial decision that led to this subheadline, because if they didn't want to make this point to try to say that the White House had misled the public, why would they put it in bold face above the fold, and then not -- and then it's not supported by any of the facts or the contradictory statements in the article.

Q But that's very difficult to judge when you won't give us the facts.

MS. PERINO: I respect the fact that Attorney General Mukasey has asked for a preliminary inquiry, that he's working with CIA General Counsel on, as well as General Hayden. Our White House Counsel is supporting that. And CBS News is free to speculate as much as it wants, but I'm not going to do that. And I haven't done it in the past.

Q But it's --

Q You're not even --

Q -- you say it was contradicting you --

MS. PERINO: It says the White House role was wider than "it" said -- "it" is referring to the White House, I am the spokesperson for the White House.

Q Okay. Okay, but you're defining it that way. In fact, right after the first -- this story first broke, people within the administration did say privately that, in fact, Harriet Miers had told the CIA not to destroy the tapes and that that suggested that the White House, in fact, was saying don't destroy. Now this New York Times story is saying four people in the President -- or Vice President's inner circle actually talked to the CIA about it. So that does suggest a wider role.

MS. PERINO: I am not accountable for all the anonymous sources that you turn up. I'm not. I am accountable -- I speak for the President and the White House. This says that I was misleading, and I was not.

Q It doesn't say you. It doesn't say you at all. And there were other people in the administration who --

MS. PERINO: The White House does not comment. The only thing that I have said from this podium is regarding to the President and his recollection. And if CNN has different information that they want to provide to me that contradicts what I've said, you know, let's see it.

Q They didn't specifically say it's you. It's talking about the White House, the administration in general.

MS. PERINO: I speak for the White House. I represent the White House.

Q Why do you take it personally?

MS. PERINO: I'm not taking it personally. I'm taking it -- I speak for the White House. It's not a personal thing. The White House asked for a correction. And I would remind you, The New York Times is going to do one.

Q What's the correction going to say.

Q But, Dana, why would it compromise the investigation for you to say one way or the other whether these officials knew of the tapes?

MS. PERINO: Well, the question --

Q (Inaudible) that you had --

MS. PERINO: -- some of the questions that you had are legitimate questions that the public has and that the Attorney General and General Hayden has is who knew what when. And that is part of the inquiry. And so that is what they have asked us not to comment on.

Q But why would that compromise the investigation? I mean, it's pretty straightforward. There's four people cited in the story and to say whether they knew or whether they didn't is a very simple matter.

MS. PERINO: Look, I think that in any case, you know, if I were to have said something to you two weeks ago when this first started, that then as more information has turned up, provides more information that makes it look like maybe I had misled you, then we would be having a very different conversation here. There's a good reason why I'm not commenting and why the White House is not commenting, and General Mukasey and General Hayden are doing a joint preliminary inquiry.

Q Can you tell us when you expect to hear some of the results of this inquiry?

MS. PERINO: I don't have a read on that from General Mukasey.

Q Does the White House have an opinion now on whether those tapes should have been destroyed?

MS. PERINO: That's part of -- I'd just refer you to the same answer that I just had, which is I'm not commenting on it in any way, shape, or form.

Q Well, that's on the investigation of what happened.

MS. PERINO: I've been asked that question before and I have not commented on it, either. There is an investigation and -- preliminary inquiry, they call it, and I have to leave it at that.

Q Do you know anything about it?

MS. PERINO: What I'm saying is I'm not going to comment from the podium.

Q But there are other people in the White House who know things and have talked.

MS. PERINO: I'm not saying if there's things that I know or don't know; I'm saying I'm not commenting.

Q Dana, why do you just want the executive branch to --

MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on.

Q No, but I need to ask why will you only allow the executive branch to investigate itself? Congress wants to investigate this, and the Attorney General is saying, we're not going to cooperate.

MS. PERINO: That's a question that -- look, I understand the question and I said to you yesterday that General Mukasey and General Hayden have done a -- have asked everyone to cooperate in the preliminary inquiry. General Mukasey answered that question to members of Congress, I guess four days ago, and I refer you to him for more.

Q Do you believe in checks and balances?

MS. PERINO: Of course we do.

Olivier.

Q Dana, yesterday you mentioned conflicting reports about the Turkish incursion into northern Iraq. You said you couldn't comment on the incursion, or alleged incursion until you had more information. Do you have more information now? Can you say what happened, what the United States thinks of it? And when did Turkey first let the United States know that it was doing this?

MS. PERINO: Well, there are still conflicting reports, and there were also three different operations. And so I'd refer you to the Department of Defense for more on that. But as Secretary Rice said yesterday, we have asked Turkey for -- reminded Turkey that we need to have increased coordination and cooperation between the United States, Iraq and Turkey as we all jointly work together to try to eliminate the PKK.

Goyal.

Q Two quick questions, Dana. One, how does President feel about President Putin of Russia is the Man of the Year of Time Magazine -- and also, President's rating has gone up, but how does he feel about this -- but Russian President?

MS. PERINO: Well, President Putin is certainly an interesting figure, and Time Magazine makes its decisions based on its own editorial decision-making. And we won't comment on that. But clearly, I think that it's a -- he's an interesting figure. I haven't spoken to the President about it yet. I'll see him in a little bit.

Q And second, on Burmese leader, in the House, Congressman Crowley and Congressman Manzullo both had this resolution passed that same honor to be given to the Burmese democratic leader and (inaudible) like the Dalai Lama. Do you think President will make effort to bring her here to honor her, just like Dalai Lama?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that we would all hope that Aung San Suu Kyi would be able to leave her home and to travel freely. But I don't have information about whether or not that will be able to happen.

Q Can I follow up on that? Yesterday the First Lady had a statement saying that Myanmar (inaudible) Burma is not cooperating, not doing what the U.N. has called on it to do. On December 11th, the President said that if that were the case, then the United States would spearhead an international push for sanctions. Is the First Lady's statement an indication that, in fact, the United States has now launched a new push for sanctions?

MS. PERINO: No, not that I know of, but we will check. Mrs. Bush got a report yesterday from the U.N. Envoy Gambari, and was troubled by what she heard, which is why she issued the statement. And so if there's going to be a push for sanctions, we'll let you know.

Bret.

Q Dana, the Attorney General talked this morning about FISA. And what's the feeling in this White House about the prospects?

MS. PERINO: Well, we're very disappointed that the Senate decided not to move forward and take up the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee bill on the floor, because we think it could have passed and we think that the debate is one that we have been having for well over a year. It's not a debate we've just been having the past few months, but we had a debate leading up to the vote in August, which was a bipartisan vote, which closed the intelligence gap, which is what the DNI, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Attorney General have said.

Now Attorney General Mukasey is in charge at the Justice Department, and he sees the very real need to get this bill passed and to get it done before the clock runs out on February 1st.

So I suppose that the first order of business when Congress gets back is going to be looking at this issue.

Les.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. In Council Bluffs, Iowa, Senator Clinton said, and this is a quote -- "I am absolutely overwhelmed personally to have my friend of 25 years, Bob Kerrey, endorse me." And my question: Can you deny, Dana, that the White House was astounded by this when only 11 years ago Senator Kerrey declared, "Clinton is an unusually good liar, unusually good"?

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to comment.

Q No comment on that?

MS. PERINO: No. What's your second?

Q Eighty-one-year-old Fidel Castro, while announcing that he won't stay in power forever, also mentioned a Brazilian architect who is still working at age 100. And my question: Does the White House believe that this indicates Fidel will stay in power for 19 more years, if he can, or not? (Laughter.)

MS. PERINO: I don't have a comment on his health. Obviously we hope that democracy could be restored to Cuba soon.

Q Thank you.

Q Dana, do you have any indication of whether the President is going to sign the federal terrorism insurance extension?

MS. PERINO: The TRIA bill? Yes. (Laughter.)

Q How about the -- bill?

MS. PERINO: We are reviewing that bill. Last spring we had concerns about the bill in SAPS -- statements of administration policy -- that we put out. We are looking at the bill right now. Some of the concerns we have regarded the time frame that they allowed in the bill for responses, which I think was 20 days, and also an inability to collect on fees if you go past that 20-day mark. So they're reviewing the bill now for the final scrub of it before we can decide whether or not he'll sign it.

Paula.

Q Does the President plan to sign a military tax relief bill if it reaches his desk?

MS. PERINO: I know you've asked Tony Fratto this question, and we are looking into this bill. I don't have a lot of information on it, but we'll try to get it for you.

Q And also, I have just one question, if you could clarify on -- you repeatedly keep saying the President has no recollection of the issue at hand. So does that mean that he could have heard about it beforehand, but it simply slipped his mind?

MS. PERINO: It means what it means, that he had no recollection.

Q Thank you.

END 12:49 P.M. EST For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 19, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Dana Perino and Eisenhower Executive Office Building, or Secretary Condoleezza Rice Remarks With Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari VIDEO PODCAST and The Tragic Prelude. John Brown and UCLA researchers discover cancer cells 'feel' much softer than normal cells

Secretary Condoleezza Rice Remarks With Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari VIDEO PODCAST

Secretary Condoleezza Rice Remarks With Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Baghdad, Iraq, December 18, 2007. PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE (15:48)

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: Okay. First of all, let me welcome you all with the -- Secretary Rice again to Baghdad. We're very pleased to see you again here among us. And I'm delighted to see a great deal of progress thanks to your efforts and the efforts of the Multi-National Forces and the Iraqi security forces. That really has changed the situation on the ground. I think today was one of the rare moments where Secretary Rice had lunch in the Red Zone in Baghdad. I think it was an interesting experience.

Anyway, but there has been a great deal of progress as you can see. This is thanks, you see, to the joint efforts by the Iraqi Government and the help and the support of the Multi-National forces. These gains are really very significant. We see them in the streets of Baghdad in many provinces. This needs to be pressed on. I think we need a political and legislative surge also, you see, to augment and strengthen these gains. Also, I reassured Secretary Rice about our continued efforts to ensure a better regional cooperation with the efforts of the Iraqi Government. I think we are making some progress here also with our neighbors.

And on the international level, also, I think we are entering into a new period or area in our relations with you. Early next year, we hope to start serious negotiation about the long term security, economic, and political agreement between Iraq and the United States. So once again, I'd like to welcome you here, again, a most special welcome. Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, thank you very much, Minister Zebari. I want to thank you for your leadership as one of your country's political leaders, but also you've been a terrific colleague as Foreign Minister and I look forward to working with you. First of all, there has been progress made here and we're continuing our discussions about how to build on the security and economic progress that is being made here and the significant developments -- political developments at the local and provincial level to make certain that national reconciliation takes place.

We are also -- we've been very active in talking about my visit to Kirkuk this morning, which was a very good visit, and I had a chance to meet also with UN Special Representative de Mistura. That speaks to the improved international climate to which the Foreign Minister spoke because the United Nations mandate under 1770 is an expanded mandate and I think that there is much that the UN can do in areas with technical support for Kirkuk and other issues. And finally, on the regional side, I do believe that you have improved relations with your neighbors. We look forward to another meeting of the neighbors conference, the expanded neighbors conference sometime relatively early next year. But again, thank you for your leadership and we look forward to continuing to support the Iraqi people in their march toward democracy.

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: Thank you.

MR. MCCORMACK: We have time for a few questions. The first one is Sylvie Lanteaume from AFP.

QUESTION: I had a question for both of you. Secretary, in terms of the Turkish army and of the Iraqi territory today, just when you were in northern Iraq -- I wanted to know if, first, the Turks informed you in advance of this operation and if the U.S. helped them with intelligence. And Mr. Minister, did you raise this -- the question of the incursion of the Turks in the Iraqi territory with the Secretary today?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, the United States, Iraq, and Turkey share a common interest in stopping the activities of the PKK which threaten to undo the stability of the north, which clearly have resulted in deaths in Turkey, and when we were recently together in Istanbul, we actually had a trilateral discussion about our common interest in dealing with this problem. This is a circumstance in which the United States has constantly counseled that we need a overall comprehensive approach to this problem, that we should do nothing and no one should do anything that threatens to destabilize the north.

As to the activities, things unfortunately do go along -- go on along this border. As to the activity last Sunday, this was a Turkish decision and we have made clear to the Turkish Government that we continue to be concerned about anything that could lead to innocent civilian casualties or to a destabilization of the north.

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: Well, the Iraqi Government has protested to the Turkish Government over the attacks on the civilians recently. And as we speak, also there is another limited military incursion going on, but high up in the mountains in unpopulated areas. But the Iraqi Government and the regional authorities are monitoring that very, very closely. I think as the Secretary said, we have shared common goals here. We want stability and security in Iraq and with Iraq's neighbors also and the border areas. PKK presence is unacceptable. PKK has conducted terrorist activities against Turkish interests and civilians and their presence is not acceptable, neither by the Iraqi Government or the KRG authorities.

We also have sought to work together jointly in a trilateral way. Only recently before this incident, in fact, the Iraqi Government took the initiative to invite for -- to ask for a meeting where the United States and Turkey tried to follow up on this. We believe any unilateral actions to destabilize the situation will harm Iraq's interests and Turkish interests at the same time, but in the same time, we fully understand and appreciate the legitimate security concern Turkey has over the PKK terrorist activities against them.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) (Inaudible) from the (inaudible) newspaper in UK agency. My question to Secretary Rice, sometimes the democratic opinion becomes blood against the Iraqis themselves and the American forces. How do you see the differences in opinion between the political leaders? Has it been translated on the ground in blood? Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, I believe that the differences between the political leaders are differences that emerge in a democratic process, but the key is that the key democratic leaders here who represent large elected blocs put together an agreement on August 26th on a way forward. It had, as its mission, political reconciliation. It has a legislative agenda. It has a set of steps to make Iraq a more efficient and functioning place. I think that it leads, in a way, to a roadmap where the Iraqis -- the Iraqi central government to work with its provinces, to make certain that the whole system is working.

And that's the way that democratic leaders should get together and should resolve their differences and that's to agree on a way forward and they have a way forward. And I have strongly encouraged the leaders with whom I've met today, and I will soon meet with the Prime Minister and I will do the same, that there be urgent implementation of that August 26th agreement, that there be urgent attempts to -- urgent efforts to make certain that the legislative agenda is moving forward, that there will be passage of the budget so that money can get to the governments, the provincial and local governments, as well as be used for services to support the Iraqi people.

I think we should note that there is some -- there's been some important progress. There was a pension law passed very recently which is a very good law that benefits all Iraqis. The Iraqis have improved their budget execution and we know that the 2007 budget was spent much more effectively on behalf of the people of Iraq, so differences are going to emerge. But the importance is that when you have differences, political leaders who have been elected by the people to work together on behalf of the people have to overcome those differences and implement policies.

QUESTION: Secretary Rice, just to follow up on that question, you've been here a great many times to urge the national political leadership to try to achieve reconciliation and you've gotten assurances a great many times that they would do so and yet it has been agonizingly difficult for them to do that. Can you elaborate a little bit on why you think the circumstances are so different now that this will actually lead to more progress?

And, Mr. Foreign Minister, can you tell us why Iraq chose not to attend the Annapolis conference last month?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, Arshad, you're right, I have urged political reconciliation. I want to emphasize that there are some elements of that political reconciliation that are not represented in the so-called benchmark laws -- by the way, benchmarks that the Iraqis themselves set, that we need to clearly recognize that those have gone forward; for instance, the pension law is very important. The fact that this is a government that was able to pass a budget in 2007 and then to allocate that funding out to the provinces, so that revenue is being shared with the provinces.

But I remember very well discussions here a year or so ago when the leadership said very bluntly that without an improvement in the security situation, without the population beginning to feel more secure, without Iraq feeling that it was getting performance from its security services in conjunction with the coalition forces, that it was very hard to keep one's mind on politics and that's completely understandable. But the surge that the President offered -- ordered as well as the efforts of Iraqi security forces and the efforts of concerned citizens and local efforts like the one that took place in Anbar have improved the security situation and they have given a kind of window in which political reconciliation needs to take place, but these two are not unrelated. And one reason that I am more hopeful being here today at the end of 2007 than perhaps a year or so ago is that these improvements do show that Iraqis can count on a future with this democracy, a future in which violence is not necessarily a daily way of life. But it's going to take a really large effort by these political leaders to push forward.

We have to recognize these are existential issues of a young democracy. We all understand that democracy is hard and that it takes time. But it is also the case that when people elect their leaders, they expect them to make very strong efforts to move forward and that's the conversation that we had today and that's the conversation we're going to have with the Prime Minister shortly.

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: On -- the reason why Iraq did not attend the Annapolis conference -- in fact, it was a government decision not to attend. And the main reason was because we had just concluded this long term agreement with the United State and if we go to Annapolis the next day or the day after, people will jump into conclusion. But in fact, that decision was debated, was discussed in the government, and the opinion -- we were divided, but the final decision was not to go.

QUESTION: Jumped to what conclusion?

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: Sorry?

QUESTION: Jumped to what conclusion? What (inaudible)?

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: The conclusion is what this long-term -- declaration of long-term principle will take you to Annapolis.

SECRETARY RICE: Some kind of deal. (Laughter.) Is that what you're saying?

QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) (Inaudible) news agency. My question is directed to Secretary Rice. With regard to the agreement -- the security agreement, there are some objections from the Iraqi politicians. They are saying we must go back to the Iraqi parliament with regard to the security agreement. This is my first question.

The second question is that there are some doubts from some Iraqis. They are saying that the improvement in the security situation at this time specifically is attributed to the fact that the United States wants, at this time, for the security situation to improve. What is your response to that? Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, the United States has wanted the security situation to improve and the President did add additional American forces to help. But it is also due to the efforts of the Iraqi security forces which have been stronger and stronger as we've gone along. I have listened each week as the commanders have briefed President Bush about the performance of the Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi people should be very proud of how well their security forces are performing; sometimes on their own, sometimes in the lead, sometimes in -- but always in close coordination with the coalition forces. This is a real success story for the Iraqis who are defending Iraq. It is also a factor -- the factor of local people deciding that they are not going to allow their streets to be taken by terrorists and by criminals and making certain that they protect their communities and that they cooperate with authorities for their protection.

As to the long term security agreement, this is something that has been worked out with the elected government of Iraq and I leave it to Iraq to decide what needs to be done in terms of the finalization of that agreement.

FOREIGN MINISTER ZEBARI: Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Thank you.

2007/T20-7, Released on December 18, 2007

Technorati Tags: Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari or Multi-National Forces Iraqi or Mitt Romney New TV Ad, "Choice: Judgment" VIDEO and Wagner Chrismas Tree and Nano-sized voltmeter measures electric fields deep within cells

Mitt Romney New TV Ad, "Choice: Judgment" VIDEO

From Romney For President Boston, MA – Today, Romney for President launched its newest television ad, "Choice: Judgment." The ad highlights the very important choice voters will have to make when it comes to fighting crime in the United States. While Governors Romney and Huckabee both believe in protecting life and traditional marriage, they have very different crime records. In Massachusetts, Governor Romney fought for tougher penalties to combat methamphetamines and respected juries' decisions by not pardoning a single criminal. In Arkansas, Governor Huckabee granted 1,033 pardons and commutations, including 12 convicted murderers. This was more clemencies than the previous three governors combined. Governor Huckabee also reduced penalties for manufacturing methamphetamines.

Monday, Dec 17, 2007, FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, CONTACT: Kevin Madden (857) 288-6390

The ad will begin airing tomorrow as part of the campaign's rotation in Iowa. Script and viewing links are below.

Script For "Choice: Judgment" (TV:30):

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this message."

ANNOUNCER: "Two pro-life Governors. Both support a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage.

"The difference?

"Romney got tough on drugs like meth.

"He never pardoned a single criminal.

"And Mike Huckabee?

"He granted 1,033 pardons and commutations, including 12 convicted murderers.

"Huckabee granted more clemencies than the previous three governors combined.

"Even reduced penalties for manufacturing methamphetamine.

"On crime. The difference is judgment."

Technorati Tags: Mitt Romney or Presidential Podcast 12/15/07 and New Year's Baby and Blue dye could hold the key to super processing power

Mike Huckabee TV Ad What really matters VIDEO

From Mike Huckabee for President: What really matters. Governor Huckabee shares his holiday greeting on what really matters this Christmas season. Author: explorehuckabee Keywords: Huckabee what matters christmas Added: December 17, 2007

n January 2007, I formed a 2008 presidential exploratory committee because I feel the country needs a reawakening and a leadership to address an array of issues, including how to improve the nation's infrastructure, education system, environmental policy and failing health care system.

In the past year and a half, I have visited nearly 30 states to campaign for Republican candidates and conservative causes — and to share my message of "vertical politics" that I believe reflects American values and priorities.

From 1996-2007, I served as the 44th Governor of the great state of Arkansas. When I left office on January 9, 2007, I set out on a nationwide tour to promote my fifth book, "From Hope to Higher Ground." The book reveals my optimistic vision for what America can become with the right kind of leadership and a clear direction.

Technorati Tags: Mike Huckabee or Presidential Podcast 12/15/07 and New Year's Baby and Blue dye could hold the key to super processing power

Bee strategy helps servers run more sweetly

Honeybees maximize efficiency with dance communication.

Computer version of bee dance directs server power ATLANTA (November 16, 2007) -- Honeybees somehow manage to efficiently collect a lot of nectar with limited resources and no central command — after all, the queen bee is too busy laying eggs to oversee something as mundane as where the best nectar can be found on any given morning. According to new research from the Georgia Institute of Technology, the swarm intelligence of these amazingly organized bees can also be used to improve the efficiency of Internet servers faced with similar challenges.

A bee dance-inspired communications system developed by Georgia Tech helps Internet servers that would normally be devoted solely to one task move between tasks as needed, reducing the chances that a Web site could be overwhelmed with requests and lock out potential users and customers. Compared with the way server banks are commonly run, the honeybee method typically improves service by 4 percent to 25 percent in tests based on real Internet traffic. The research was published in the journal Bioinspiration and Biomimetics.

After studying the efficiency of honeybees, Craig Tovey, a professor in the H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Georgia Tech, realized through conversations with Sunil Nakrani, a computer science colleague visiting from the University of Oxford, that bees and servers had strikingly similar barriers to efficiency.

“I studied bees for years, waiting for the right application,” Tovey said. “When you work with biomimetics (the study of how biological principles can be applied to design and engineering), you have to look for a close analogy between two systems — never a superficial one. And this definitely fit the bill.”

The more Tovey and Nakrani discussed bees and servers, the surer they became that somehow the bees’ strategies for allocating limited resources in an unpredictable and constantly changing environment could be applied to Internet servers.

Honeybees have a limited number of workers at any given time to fly out to flowers, collect nectar, return to the hive and repeat until the nectar source is depleted. Sometimes, there’s an abundance of nectar to be collected; at other times nectar is scarce. The bees’ environment is constantly changing — some flower patches occasionally yield much better nectar than others, the seasons shift and rainy days make nectar collection difficult. So how do the bees manage to keep a steady flow of nectar coming into the hive"

Internet servers, which provide the computing power necessary to run Web sites, typically have a set number of servers devoted to a certain Web site or client. When users access a Web site, the servers provide computing power until all the requests to access and use the site have been fulfilled. Sometimes there are a lot of requests to access a site (for instance, a clothing company’s retail site after a particularly effective television ad during a popular sporting event) and sometimes there are very few. Predicting demand for Web sites, including whether a user will access a video clip or initiate a purchase, is extremely difficult in a fickle Internet landscape, and servers are frequently overloaded and later become completely inactive at random.

Bees tackle their resource allocation problem (i.e. a limited number of bees and unpredictable demand on their time and desired location) with a seamless system driven by “dances.” Here’s how it works: The scout bees leave the hive in search of nectar. Once they’ve found a promising spot, they return to the hive “dance floor” and perform a dance. The direction of the dance tells the waiting forager bees which direction to fly, the number of waggle turns conveys the distance to the flower patch; and the length conveys the sweetness of the nectar.

The forager bees then dance behind the scouts until they learn the right steps (and the particulars about the nectar), forming a bobbing conga line of sorts. Then they fly out to collect the nectar detailed in the dance. As long as there’s still nectar to be found, the bees that return continue the dance. Other forager bees continue to fly toward the source until the dancing slowly tapers off or a new bee returns with a more appealing dance routine (Hey, the nectar over here is even better!).

While all that dancing may not sound like a model of efficiency, it’s actually optimal for the unpredictable nectar world the bees inhabit, Tovey said. The system allows the bees to seamlessly shift from one nectar source to a more promising nectar source based on up-to-the-minute conditions. All this without a clear leader or central command to slow the decision making process.

“But the bees aren’t performing a computation or strategy, they ARE the computation,” Tovey added.

Internet servers, on the other hand, are theoretically optimized for “normal” conditions, which are frequently challenged by fickle human nature. By assigning certain servers to a certain Web site, Internet hosts are establishing a system that works well under normal conditions and poorly under conditions that strain demand. When demand for one site swells, many servers sit idly by as the assigned servers reach capacity and begin shifting potential users to a lengthening queue that tries their patience and turns away potential customers.

Tovey and Nakrani set to work translating the bee strategy for these idle Internet servers. They developed a virtual “dance floor” for a network of servers. When one server receives a user request for a certain Web site, an internal advertisement (standing in a little less colorfully for the dance) is placed on the dance floor to attract any available servers. The ad’s duration depends on the demand on the site and how much revenue its users may generate. The longer an ad remains on the dance floor, the more power available servers devote to serving the Web site requests advertised. ###

RELATED:

• H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• Center for Biologically Inspired Design at Georgia Tech
• Craig Tovey

Contact: Megan McRainey, Institute Communications & Public Affairs megan.mcrainey@icpa.gatech.edu 404-894-6016 Georgia Institute of Technology

Technorati Tags: Georgia Institute of Technology and Internet servers or Honeybees and Presidential Podcast 12/15/07 and New Year's Baby and Blue dye could hold the key to super processing power

Freedom Calendar 12/15/07 - 12/22/07

December 15, 2000, President-elect George W. Bush nominates Colin Powell as first African-American Secretary of State.

December 16, 2003, President George W. Bush signs law creating National Museum of African American History and Culture.

December 17, 2000, Republican Alberto Gonzales named as first Hispanic to serve as White House Counsel by President George W. Bush.

December 18, 1852, Birth of Republican U.S. Rep. George White (R-NC), last former slave to serve in Congress; authored bill to make lynching a federal crime.

December 19, 1820, Birth of Republican activist Mary Livermore, organizer of Women’s Suffrage Convention in 1868.

December 20, 2000, California Republican Ann Veneman nominated as first woman to be U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

December 21, 1981, President Ronald Reagan establishes Task Force on Legal Equality for Women.

December 22, 1870, African-American Republican Jefferson Long becomes U.S. Representative from Georgia.

“The first Republican I knew was my father and he is still the Republican I most admire. He joined our party because the Democrats inJim Crow Alabama of 1952 would not register him to vote. The Republicans did. My father has never forgotten that day, and neither have I."

Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State

Technorati Tags: President Bush and Freedom Calendar or Booker T. Washington and Republicans or African-Americans and Brown v. Board of Education or Ronald Reagan and Michael Steele or Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass or 40 acres and a mule or Martin Luther King and Voting Rights Act of 1965 or Dred Scott or Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography and Coral snake (Micrurus fulvius tenere) and Fatigue effects in silicon

Presidential Podcast 12/15/07

Presidential Podcast 12/15/07 . Subscribe to Our Podcast feed or online podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring full audio and text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned. In Focus: Defense

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House radio address or Congress and defense authorization bill or Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography and Coral snake (Micrurus fulvius tenere) and Fatigue effects in silicon

Bush radio address 12/15/07 full audio, text transcript

bush radio address 12/15/07 full audio, text transcript. President's Radio Address . In Focus: Defense

Subscribe to Our Podcast feed or online 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. In a time of war, America's top priority should be to ensure that our troops on the front lines get the funding they need. So beginning in February, I submitted detailed funding requests to Congress to fund operations in the war on terror. Congress has had months to pass this funding. Unfortunately, with just days to go before members leave for their Christmas vacation, they still have not come through with these funds.

This week Congress considered a defense authorization bill. An authorization bill is a pledge to spend money. Under such a bill, Congress will make a promise to fund our troops in combat. But a congressional promise -- even if enacted -- does not pay the bills. It is time for Congress to provide our troops with actual funding.

The stakes are high for our men and women on the front lines. Our troops are striking blows against the terrorists and extremists in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and these funds are critical to their continued success. The funds I have requested include money to carry out combat operations against the enemy. They include money to train the Iraqi and Afghan security forces to take on more responsibility for the defense of their countries. They include money for civilian agencies deployed in the field with our military to help build local governments and create jobs. And they include money for intelligence operations to protect our troops on the battlefield.

Congress has had plenty of time to consider the emergency funds our troops need. Time is running out. And Pentagon officials say that continued delay in funding our troops will soon begin to have a damaging impact on the operations of our military. Congress' responsibility is clear: They must deliver vital funds for our troops -- and they must do it before they leave for Christmas. Our men and women on the front lines will be spending this holiday season far from their families and loved ones. And this Christmas, they deserve more than words from Congress. They deserve action.

Thank you for listening.

END For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 15, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House radio address or Congress and defense authorization bill or Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography and Coral snake (Micrurus fulvius tenere) and Fatigue effects in silicon

Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación 12/15/07

forre el audio de la dirección de radio 12/15/07 por completo, transcripción del texto. (nota de los redactores: ninguna lengua española mp3 lanzó esta semana, apesadumbrada) PODCAST

Suscribir a nuestro canal de Podcast de Odeo o del 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.

En tiempos de guerra, la primera prioridad de Estados Unidos deberá ser la de asegurar que nuestras tropas en el frente reciban los fondos que necesitan. Por lo tanto, comenzando en Febrero yo sometí al Congreso solicitudes detalladas de fondos para financiar las operaciones de la guerra contra el terror. El Congreso ha tenido meses para aprobar este financiamiento. Desafortunadamente, faltando apenas días para que los miembros salgan de vacaciones para Navidad, aún no han aprobado estos fondos.

Esta semana el Congreso consideró un proyecto de ley de autorización de defensa. Un proyecto de ley de autorización es un compromiso para gastar dinero. Bajo un tal proyecto de ley, el Congreso prometerá financiar nuestras tropas en combate. Pero una promesa del Congreso - aún cuando sancionada - no paga las cuentas. Es hora de que el Congreso proporcione financiamiento verdadero a nuestras tropas.

Hay mucho en juego para nuestros hombres y mujeres en las líneas del frente. Nuestras tropas están asestando golpes contra los terroristas y extremistas en Irak y Afganistán - y estos fondos son críticos para que continúen con éxito. Los fondos que he solicitado incluyen dinero para llevar a cabo operaciones de combate contra el enemigo. Incluyen dinero para entrenar las Fuerzas de Seguridad de Irak y Afganistán para asumir más responsabilidad por la defensa de sus países. Incluyen dinero para agencias civiles desplegadas en el campo con nuestras fuerzas armadas para ayudar a construir gobiernos locales y crear empleos. E incluyen dinero para operaciones de inteligencia para proteger a nuestras tropas en el campo de batalla.

El Congreso ha tenido bastante tiempo para considerar los fondos de emergencia que necesitan nuestras tropas. El tiempo se está acabando. Y oficiales del Pentágono dicen que la demora continua en financiar a nuestras tropas pronto comenzará a tener un impacto perjudicial sobre las operaciones de nuestras fuerzas armadas.

La responsabilidad del Congreso es clara: Deben entregar fondos vitales para nuestras tropas - y deben hacerlo antes de partir por Navidad.

Nuestros hombres y mujeres en las líneas del frente pasarán esta época festiva lejos de sus familias y seres queridos. Y esta Navidad, merecen más que palabras del Congreso. Merecen acción.

Gracias por escuchar.

Para su publicación inmediata Oficina del Secretario de Prensa 15 de diciembre de 2007

Etiquetas De Technorati: Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación, y Presidente Bush or Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography and Coral snake (Micrurus fulvius tenere) and Fatigue effects in silicon

Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography

Dr. James Peake is a 1966 graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. His father was a medical services officer, and his mother was an Army nurse. He is also a graduate of the United States Army War College, in 1988 Dr. Peake's Career Spans Over 40 Years In The Field Of Military Medicine, During Which Time He Helped Develop Many Of Today's Lifesaving Battlefield Medical Techniques.

His distinguished military career began in 1966 with service as an infantry officer in Vietnam.

Dr. Peake was awarded the Silver Star, a Bronze Star with 'V' device and oak leaf cluster, and Purple Heart with oak leaf cluster for his service in Vietnam as a platoon leader with the 101st Airborne Division.

Dr. Peake has also been honored with the Order of Military Medical Merit; the "A" Professional Designator; and the Medallion, Surgeon General of the United States. His awards and decorations also include the Distinguished Service Medal, Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit with three oak leaf clusters, the Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters, and an Air Medal. Dr. Peake wears the Combat Infantryman Badge.

Other Awards and decorations that Lt. Gen. Peake has received include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Joint Services Commendation Medal, Army Commendation Medal with "V" device (with one oak leaf cluster), Humanitarian Service Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Navy Meritorious Unit Commendation, Joint Meritorious Unit Award (with one oak leaf cluster), Senior Parachutist Badge, Pathfinder Badge, Ranger Tab, Combat Medic Badge and Army Staff Identification Badge.

Dr. Peake was wounded twice in battle and received his acceptance letter to Cornell University Medical College while in the hospital recovering from injury. He attended medical school through an Army scholarship and then returned to the Army for his medical internships and residencies.

Dr. Peake was commander in several medical posts, and is credited with improving the training and techniques of the Army medical force. Notably, Dr. Peake served as Commanding General of the U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School – the largest medical training facility in the world, with over 30,000 students.

From 2000 to 2004, Dr. Peake served as the 40th Surgeon General of the United States Army. In this position, he commanded 50,000 medical personnel and 187 army medical facilities worldwide with an operating budget of almost $5 billion.

He retired from the Army in 2004, following service as lead commander in several medical posts, including four years as the U.S. Army Surgeon General.

Previous key assignments include Commander, U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School and Installation Commander, Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Deputy Commander, U.S. Army Medical Command, Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Commanding General, Madigan Army Medical Center/Northwest Health Service Support Activity, Tacoma, Washington; Commanding General, 44th Medical Brigade/Corps Surgeon, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Deputy Director, Professional Services/Chief, Consultant, Office of the Surgeon General, Falls Church, Virginia; Commander, 18th Medical Command and 121st Evacuation Hospital/Command Surgeon, Seoul, Korea; Deputy Commander for Clinical Services, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; Assistant Chief, Cardiothoracic Surgery, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Staff General Surgeon/Chief, General Surgery Clinic, DeWitt Army Hospital, Fort Belvoir, Va.; and General Surgery Resident, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

From 2004 to 2006, Dr. Peake was the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Project HOPE, a non-profit international health foundation with offices and programs in more than 30 different countries on five continents. While at Project HOPE, Dr. Peake helped to orchestrate the use of civilian volunteers aboard the Navy Hospital Ship Mercy as it responded to the tsunami in Indonesia and aboard the Hospital Ship Comfort as part of the Hurricane Katrina response.

Dr. Peake now serves as the Chief Medical Director and Chief Operating Officer of QTC Management, Inc. QTC serves veterans and separating soldiers by providing timely medical examination and electronic medical record services to help government agencies manage medical data and information in a cost-effective manner.

On October 30, 2007 President Bush announced his intention to nominate Lieutenant General James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D., to serve as Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

As Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) noted, Dr. Peake's "time as an infantry officer gave [him] a unique warrior's perspective on how our wounded should be cared for." (Committee On Appropriations, Subcommittee On Defense, Hearing, U.S. Senate, 4/8/04)

Military.com's Tom Philpott: "]mproved training, now being used to great effect in Iraq and Afghanistan, was largely the vision of retired Lt. Gen. James Peake … in the late 1990s [as Commanding General of the U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School] and during his tour as Army surgeon general from 2000 through 2004." (Tom Philpott, "Military Update," The Honolulu Advertiser, 11/14/05)

On December 14, 2007, the Senate unanimously confirmed Dr. James Peake to serve as Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

RELATED:

• President Bush Nominates Dr. James Peake as Secretary of Veterans Affairs - VIDEO

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Dr. James Peake and Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or Pearl Harbor Remembered and Mulberry Street NYC circa 1900 and 'High Q' NIST nanowires may be practical oscillators

Confirmation of Dr. James Peake as Secretary of Veterans Affairs

President Bush Pleased By Confirmation of Dr. James Peake as Secretary of Veterans Affairs Lt. Gen. James B. Peake (Ret.), M.D Biography I am pleased that the Senate unanimously confirmed Dr. James Peake to serve as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Peake is a decorated veteran, highly-skilled physician, and proven leader who has devoted his career to serving America's men and women in uniform. His decades of expertise in combat medicine and health care management have provided him with a thorough understanding of the Department's responsibility to care for America's veterans.

One of his first tasks as Secretary will be to ensure that my Administration continues to swiftly implement the recommendations of the Dole-Shalala Commission on Wounded Warriors. I am confident that he will build upon our record of improving care, reducing bureaucracy, and ensuring that our veterans receive the benefits they deserve. # # #

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 14, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Dr. James Peake and Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or Pearl Harbor Remembered and Mulberry Street NYC circa 1900 and 'High Q' NIST nanowires may be practical oscillators

White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 12/13/07 VIDEO PODCAST

Press Briefing by Dana Perino, FULL STREAMING VIDEO, White House Conference Center Briefing Room, PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE MP3, Dana M. Perino Biography, 12:45 P.M. EDT.

MS. PERINO: Hello. I realize I don't have anything to start with, because we released the President's statement on Lebanon. So I'll go to questions.

Q Senator Reid says that they're going to remove the tax title from the energy bill. Does that lift the White House veto threat?

MS. PERINO: Well, we'll have to -- there's a series of votes happening right now on the energy bill. We're pleased that they decided to take out the tax title, because that was one of the ones that the President said he would veto the bill over. But there's a long day ahead of them. They're going through a lot of amendments, so we'll have to see the final bill. But things look promising.

Q And are there other instances -- as you look across what Congress has got left, do you see other signs of compromise coming?

MS. PERINO: Well, we were encouraged by what we have heard from Capitol Hill about the budget, and that there's a lot of details to be worked out, but the Democrats, over the next few days, are going to have to write the bill, because that is still not finished. There's a lot of things we don't know yet. We don't know what their top line would be, we don't know what policies they might try to put into the bill; we don't know what tax increases they might try to put into the bill. There's lots of things that they have to work out. But in general we're encouraged that it looks like we can get to an end game here.

Q Senator John Ensign has announced plans to introduce legislation to create a bipartisan commission to take a second look at the intelligence on Iran that's contained in the NIE. I know the President himself has said he believes that Iran is still dangerous. Does the White House support such a commission to just get a second look at that intelligence?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think first of all, I think you should go back and look at the NIE, because the NIE also supports the President's contention that Iran is still dangerous, and that it continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material that could be used to * (pawn) out new ballistic weapons that they continue to put together. Plus, they have been not forthcoming with the IAEA, as they said they would be, and they had a covert nuclear weapons program. And so there's a lot more questions that were raised by the NIE, and I don't think that anything in the NIE should give us comfort that Iran is not a danger. It remains a danger, and that's why the allies agree with us.

As to a nonpartisan commission to look at the intelligence, I'll check into that. The bottom line for the President on the NIE was that the 16 intelligence communities -- community came together, they assessed all of the intelligence. They spent a good deal of time checking it. And one of the things that they did was they told the President in August, we are due to put this NIE out in response to a congressional inquiry; we're not going to make the deadline, because there's new information, and we have to check it out. So they were very thorough, and the President appreciates all the hard work that they did on it. I just don't know if there's a need to have a second look at it.

Q I was going to say, you yourself just said the NIE raised more questions than it answered. So perhaps that, indeed, does suggest a second look --

MS. PERINO: No, it raises questions about Iran. And the ball is in Iran's court, in order to come forward and be very truthful about its program or not. They're going to have -- the choice is theirs to make. Meanwhile, our allies, the P5-plus-one, continues to move forward on a third resolution for the U.N. Security Council.

Q So was that statement -- to draw from that that the President is fully confident in the information contained in the NIE?

MS. PERINO: Look, the NIE -- the President accepted the results of the NIE. And I think any time -- in regards to intelligence, you learn new information. That's what it's about. It's not a precise science. And Iran is an opaque society; they're not transparent. You cannot get a lot of information out of there. So anytime that we can get more information, that's better.

What the President asked for in 2005 is for the intelligence community to go back, take another look, try harder, get us some more information. And the new NIE was a result of that.

Q So a second look isn't --

MS. PERINO: Obviously, the intelligence community continues -- the intelligence community did not stop looking at the Iranian issue when they published the NIE. That work is ongoing, and I think that the President -- I know that the President appreciates their work, and I think that they should support it because they are doing very difficult work on behalf of the American people to try to keep us safe, and they're trying to get the most accurate, detailed information that they can from a very opaque society.

Ann.

Q When will President Bush get a look at the Mitchell Report on use of steroids in baseball? And what kind of burdens and responsibility does the President think is on the owners of baseball to do something about the problem?

MS. PERINO: Well, the President looks forward to seeing the report by Senator Mitchell. He has not seen it yet, and the President hopes that this report marks the beginning of the end of steroid abuse. I would remind you that in 2004, the President used time in his State of the Union address to highlight the problem that he saw with steroid abuse, especially because of the message that it sends to children who look up to professional athletes. The President called on team owners and union representatives, coaches and players, to take the rid -- take the initiative to get rid of steroids in baseball. We'll look at the recommendations; there might be recommendations within the report that we haven't seen yet that speak specifically to owners, and so we'll take a look at that.

Q The President has noted that the Players' Association was not particularly cooperative. Does he call on everyone now within that community to be a little more cooperative on the issue?

MS. PERINO: Well, I -- the President would seek cooperation from everyone because it's in the best interests of baseball, the best interests of our children, and ultimately for all professional sports for there to be clear transparency on this matter.

Q Is there a federal government role in this?

MS. PERINO: Not that I'm aware of.

Q Follow on that?

MS. PERINO: Let me tell you, the one part of the federal government role is something that the President did, which is that he decided in 2004 to shine a light on this issue because he saw it as something that was important enough to raise in the State in the Union, and all of you know, cover the White House, that issues that are brought up in the State of the Union carry great weight with the President.

Q May I follow?

MS. PERINO: Wendell.

Q Jose Canseco, who played for the President's team from '92 to '94, has said he cannot comprehend why Mr. Bush didn't know that steroid use was going on, on the team. Does the President regret that? Has the President thought about how it was he missed that?

MS. PERINO: Well, the President said -- I would point you to the ESPN interview from earlier this year in which he said that he did not recall steroids being used or discussed in that period in 1993 or before. But now that we have this report, which is something the President encouraged, we can shine a light on this problem and hopefully bring help to those who need it, and make sure that kids know that the strength of their character is what counts, not performance on the playground.

Q Does he regret, though, the fact that he didn't know? Does he understand why he didn't know? Did he feel he wasn't paying enough attention, or was it hidden from him?

MS. PERINO: The President said he thought long and hard about it, he just does not recall ever hearing it or seeing it. And I don't think it's time for regret; I think it's time to do what the President has done, which is take time in a State of the Union address to shine light on the issue. And now we have a result of a report that is getting a lot of attention and deservedly so.

Roger.

Q Can I just follow on that? Will we hear from the President, specifically, after the report is out?

MS. PERINO: Today? I doubt it.

Q Today or the next day or two?

MS. PERINO: I won't rule anything out, but I don't think you'll hear from him today. But I'm here on his behalf.

Q And do you know, generally, does he feel that Major League Baseball has essentially looked the other way on this problem?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that this report is an acknowledgment that they have a problem and that they're trying to resolve it.

Q Does the President feel that since baseball has looked into this it needs to expand to other sports?

MS. PERINO: That is one thing I haven't talked to the President about. But I think that steroid abuse in any professional sport would be something that the President doesn't think is necessary, thinks everyone should be able to compete on their own mettle -- and especially for children, who look up to professional athletes across the board. Steroid abuse is just -- it's not a good idea for anybody, for their own health and for the message it sends to children.

Mark.

Q I want to go on to Bali, if we're done --

MS. PERINO: Does anybody have any -- steroids -- done with steroids? Okay.

Q Okay, Bali it is. In the Vice President's remarks -- former Vice President Gore saying that the United States is principally responsible for blocking progress there. What's your response?

MS. PERINO: I can't understand where that comes from, since the point of the conference was to establish a new framework, and a post-2012 framework so that we can have discussions and negotiations that will lead to, within the next year, a specific number. That was the purpose of the Bali conference. And so it wasn't just the United States who expressed surprise that in the draft resolution there's a specific number for a cut. And we did object to that because we're not prepared at this moment to do that. We said we wanted to have that discussion and that negotiation over the next year.

Q But Yvo de Boer is saying that if you don't get specific in the road map then the whole thing can fall apart.

MS. PERINO: But there is a road map and part of the road map is to get to specifics, and that's what the negotiations are for, in the future. And the President is committed to reaching a consensus on this; he's the one who brought the major economies to Washington, D.C. on September 30th. And that was a significant step forward. Remember, Kyoto did not pass the United States Senate by any -- not even close; it was 97-0. We've come a long way.

And I would submit to you that this President is somebody who has put in place just a ton of initiatives to attack climate change, both from a private sector standpoint -- there are some mandatory rules; we are moving forward, we are supporting CAFE increases for SUVs and light trucks, which we've already done twice. We have a proposal for a third increase. We're supporting the automobile increase that Terry brought up earlier in regards to CAFE. And the methane-to-markets partnership, the Asian American partnership -- there's just a ton that we have done that was not done in the previous administration.

So we have moved forward while we have not set a specific target for a cut. We have said we are willing to do that, but we're willing to do that in the framework of post-2012, after Kyoto. And the Bali Conference, the specific purpose of Bali was to set out what that framework would be, not to identify a specific number.

Paula?

Q The Senate today passed a military tax relief bill, and it's partially offset by tax increases. Will the President veto a bill to help the military if part of it is a tax --

MS. PERINO: Right before the briefing you contacted my deputy about that, and he said he would look into it, and so he said he would do that.

Q Okay, and also -- thank you -- the Senate did remove the tax title from the energy bill, but it still is in the House energy tax bill. There has been some talk about perhaps, instead of a tax increase, targeting some of the spending programs the President considers priorities. So would the White House consider rather than tax increases, spending cuts that are aimed at some of the President's priorities?

MS. PERINO: In regards to the energy bill, or on the budget?

Q Well, in general -- the omnibus, I guess you could rename it. There are tax increases --

MS. PERINO: Well, we'll have to look at what the details are. We have recommended that if the Democrats have other spending priorities that they think that they want to put forward, well, let's look at those and have a discussion about them. But let's not just raise revenue in order to pay for them. And we've provided them with $96 billion in suggested savings so that they wouldn't have to raise taxes on the American people. But we haven't seen that. Those hard choices haven't been made by this Congress. They just decide to raise taxes on issues in order -- on the American people in order to raise more revenue in order to pay for increased domestic spending.

But we do think that it is important to have priorities when you're budgeting. But we are encouraged about the process right now. I think that we're coming to a point where there's increased discussion on Capitol Hill about how do you get to a number that the President can accept. So we'll look forward to hearing those details and, hopefully, the Democrats are talking to their Republican colleagues in the House and the Senate, because they've got to realize that they have to have Republican support and votes for these bills, or else they're not going to pass, and then, ultimately, they won't get to the President's desk anyway.

Lester.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. Senator Clinton's national co-chairman Bill Shaheen has just announced that Republicans will work hard to discover new aspects of Senator Obama's youthful drug problems, which were repeatedly detailed by Shaheen. And my question: Since Clinton's spokeswoman Kathleen Strand announced that Shaheen's comments were not authorized or condoned by the campaign in any way, does the head of the Republican Party wonder why there were no reports of Shaheen being fired for this smear of Republicans and Senator Obama?

MS. PERINO: The President is not following the 2008 campaign that closely.

Q Okay. Both Republicans and the Democrat Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee have now deplored the President's pardoning of drug dealers and carjackers while refusing to pardon two U.S. Border Patrol agents who shot a Mexican drug smuggler who disobeyed their order to stop --

MS. PERINO: I answered this question --

Q -- and my question --

MS. PERINO: I answered this question --

Q Wait a minute, I haven't asked it.

MS. PERINO: I'm sure it's the same one. (Laughter.)

Q Would the White House like to respond to Chairman Delahunt, as well as Congressmen Hunter and Rohrabacher, or will you stiff-arm them with a "no comment"?

MS. PERINO: What I'll do is refer you to the briefing on Monday when Kathleen asked the same question.

Q Not exactly the same.

Q Dana, how is the White House going to deal with these contempt citations that the Senate Judiciary Committee put out today on Rove and Bolten?

MS. PERINO: Well, the Democrats should know the futility of trying to press ahead with a criminal case. It's long been understood that the Justice Department, in situations like these -- that the constitutional prerogative of the President would make it a futile effort for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. attorneys. The Department of Justice would not require a U.S. attorney to convene a grand jury or otherwise pursue a prosecution of an individual who carries out a President's instruction not to provide documents or testimony on the basis of the President's assertion of executive privilege.

And it's interesting that the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who called for this vote today, actually summed it up back in September of 1999, when he said exactly that -- that it would be futile in order to request certain documents or testimony. And I can give you the full citation later.

So we had an offer on the table that if the Democrats wanted to get this information we would provide it in a way that would not violate executive privilege, but they decided not to take us up on that. So at this point, I don't know -- I don't know what the next step is. The Judiciary Committee has this vote, and I don't know where it goes from there.

Q It goes to the full Senate.

MS. PERINO: Well, we'll see what happens. But I'm not going to speculate.

Q Any reaction -- back on leg stuff. There's a lot of talk about $3.7 billion for veterans health, adding that to the President's top line, whether by emergency spending or just putting it in the budget. Do you -- is that a good idea?

MS. PERINO: I think that there's a lot of rumors and a lot of discussion out there, and as I said, there's a lot of writing that the Democrats have to do as they work on this bill over the next few days. And the President has said his number is $933 billion, and we'll see what they come up with.

Q But what do you think about that? Does -- is that --

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to negotiate in the press.

Q And the Iraq money, does that have to come with this whole package -- the money for Iraq -- or can they wait with that -- give you something, wait with that, or what's the --

MS. PERINO: Clearly, the President has been calling for -- and others have been calling for -- the troops be able to be secure in the fact that they would have the money that they need in order to carry out their mission, and so troop funding needs to be discussed. We want the troop funding to be dealt with before they leave, and I'm not going to get into the details of how it gets -- how we get there.

Q Thank you.

MS. PERINO: Go ahead, Laurent. One more from Laurent.

Q Dana, regarding the statement by the President on Lebanon, is the President saying that Syria is behind the assassination of General al-Hajj?

MS. PERINO: It did not say that in the statement, and so we're not prepared to say that at the moment, but clearly Syria has been interfering in Lebanon for far too long. But in this particular regard, I'm not going to say that at this moment.

Q Thank you.

END 1:01 P.M. EST. For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 13, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Dana Perino and VIDEO, or Pearl Harbor Remembered and First Day of Winter and Researchers outline structure of largest nonvirus particle ever crystallized

Republican Presidential Debate Des Moines Iowa 12/12/07 VIDEO

Republican Presidential Debate Des Moines Iowa 12/12/07 VIDEO FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Des Moines Register Republican Presidential Debate (Full Program) Episode: Des Moines Register Republican Presidential Debate, Original TV Air Date: Dec. 12, 2007 Duration: 01:30:00

Full Debate Transcript:

• Download the transcript of the Republican debate (RTF)

PREVIOUS DEBATES:

• Republican Debate Orlando Florida 10/21/07 VIDEO - Republican primary debate held in Orlando, Fla., and aired by FOX News.
• Republican debate Dearborn, Michigan 10/09/07 VIDEO - The Republican presidential candidates met in Dearborn, Mich., for their first debate in a month, their sixth major debate overall.
• Republican Presidential Debate 09/05/07 VIDEO - REPUBLICAN DEBATE FOX NEWS SEPTEMBER 05, 2007
• Republican presidential Debate MANCHESTER 06/05/07 VIDEO - Republican presidential Debate MANCHESTER, New Hampshire 06/05/07, FULL STREAMING VIDEO
• Republican presidential debate 05/15/07 VIDEO - Republican presidential debate Columbia, S.C 05/15/07

RELATED:

• Campaign 2008 » Iowa Public Television & Iowa Public Radio:

Technorati Tags: GOP PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE and Republican Presidential Debate or Des Moines, Iowa and Fox News or Alan Keyes and Youtube or Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee or Duncan Hunter and John McCain or Mitt Romney or Ron Paul and Fred Thompson or Tom Tancredo and or Pearl Harbor Remembered and Festival of lights Hanukkah Menorah and Carbon nanotubes to be replaced by MoSIx nanowires in high-tech devices says new study