China Hacks Computers of U.S. Congressmen

This is very serious. It is a breach that threatens the lives of human rights activists within China, not to mention American national security:

China on Thursday dismissed accusations from two United States lawmakers that it had hacked their office computers as alarmist and unfounded.

U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, a Virginia Republican, said his office computers had been compromised in August 2006 and that he was told by the FBI and other officials the source of the attack was inside China.

Rep. Christopher Smith, who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said his computer had also been attacked from China.

[...]Wolf said the computers that were targeted contained sensitive information about human rights in China, while Smith, a New Jersey Republican, said he had "every reason to believe" the Chinese government was to blame.

NY Landmarks for Sale to Foreigners, Including Flatiron and Chrysler Buildings

This is another example of America being sold out. It's a disgrace:

Is another New York landmark being sold to foreign investors?

The New York Post reported Wednesday that the Abu Dhabi Investment Council, a fund based in the United Arab Emirates, is in negotiations on an $800 million deal to buy a 75 percent stake in Manhattan's Chrysler Building. The report was based on information from unnamed sources.

Potential players in the deal weren't talking Wednesday. Theresa Miller, a spokeswoman for Prudential Real Estate Investors -- which owns a 75 percent stake in the building -- declined to comment on whether a sale was in the works.

The Post had reported that the Atlanta-based company TMW was the prospective seller, but Miller said TMW had been fully integrated into Prudential since the latter bought TMW several years ago.

An attempt to reach Abu Dhabi Investment Council was unsuccessful. Real estate company Tischman Speyer, which owns the remaining 25 percent stake in the building, declined to comment.

It's the second time this week that news has broken of a foreign buyer investing big-time in a prominent New York address. Time magazine reported on Tuesday that Sorgente Group, the company led by Italian real estate investor Valter Mainetti, has acquired a majority share of Manhattan's famed Flatiron Building, a historic structure known for its triangular shape.

Polls: Obama Beating McCain Among Women

McCain has a big problem on his hands. All this nonsense about Obama not winning workers, women, or hispanics is backed up by the evidence. In fact, Obama beats McCain in many categories of voters. The Republicans base of support seems to be dwindling:

Barack Obama has moved into double-digit leads over Republican John McCain in two new polls of women voters, suggesting he is drawing support from women who once backed Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Obama led McCain 51%-38% in Gallup polling of 2,263 registered female voters June 5-9. The 13-percentage-point lead among women was up from 5 points the previous week, before the Democratic nomination ended. Obama now matches Clinton's performance against McCain, Gallup said Wednesday.

The Gallup results mirrored Obama's 52%-39% lead among women in a Rasmussen Reports poll of 3,000 likely voters June 8-10. The polls' margins of error are +/— 2 to 3 percentage points. Clinton on June 4 signaled her intent to withdraw and officially suspended her campaign Saturday. Some of her supporters said they would never vote for Obama, and one man, Ed Hale, started a website for former Clinton supporters now backing McCain.

[...]Obama's gender advantage is larger than Democratic nominee John Kerry's 51%-48% showing against President Bush in the 2004 general election. But it is similar to a Gallup Poll in June of that year showing Kerry with 54% support from women to 39% for Bush.

Strategist Mark Mellman, who polled for Kerry and was neutral this year, said attacks on Kerry helped erode his standing — but his greater problem was that the "underlying fundamentals" of the race favored Bush. This year, he said, they "point pretty strongly to Democrats and Obama."

Mellman said he is not surprised to see women starting to coalesce behind Obama. Some Clinton supporters are angry, he said, including some members of his extended family. "There are such people," he said. "But they seem to be a distinct minority and over time they will be a shrinking minority."

Clintons Have Enemies List Want Revenge Against "Traitors"

This is typical of the Clinton mafia. They are thugs who happen to be politicians. Bill and Hillary are Bonnie and Clyde of American politics. The press seems not really comprehend that fact:

Mr. McAuliffe, who knows of Mr. Band’s diligent scorekeeping, emphasized that “revenge is not what the Clintons are about.” The accounting is more about being practical, he said, adding, “You have to keep track of this.”

Mr. Band, who declined to comment, is hardly alone in tallying those considered to have crossed the former candidate or the former president in recent months by supporting Mr. Obama. As the Obama bandwagon has swelled, so have the lists of people Clinton loyalists regard as some variation of “ingrate,” “traitor” or “enemy,” according to the associates and campaign officials, who would speak only on condition of anonymity.

Philippe Reines, a spokesman for both Clintons, said neither kept any specific catalog of those believed to have wronged them. “There is no list,” Mr. Reines said.

The lists maintained by supporters tend to be less formal documents than spoken diatribes, with offenders’ names spat forth in rants, gripe sessions and post-mortems.

Several names and entities are common among various list makers. The lineup invariably begins with A-list members like Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico; Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the House Democratic whip; Gregory B. Craig, Mr. Clinton’s lawyer in his impeachment and trial; David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s chief strategist; Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri; and several Kennedys. Some members of the Democratic Party’s rules committee, the state of Iowa and the caucus system in general are also near the top.

The news media have already focused on some list entries, including the online gossip purveyor Matt Drudge (who had the nerve to show up at Mrs. Clinton’s departure speech on Saturday), Todd S. Purdum of Vanity Fair (the author of a recent profile of Mr. Clinton) and the cable network MSNBC (whose hosts Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann are charter list members, Clinton associates said).

The lists are also reported to include lesser-known Obama-supporting members of Congress (for whom the Clintons campaigned), former ambassadors (appointed by Mr. Clinton) or Clinton White House officials turned Obama advisers (like Anthony Lake, a former national security adviser, and Susan Rice, a former White House and State Department official).

These are people who should know better than to ask the former president or first lady for a job recommendation for a son-in-law.

Prominent list entries tend to be philosophical about their status. “When you’re on the losing end of a campaign, your sense of victimization is higher,” said Joe Andrew, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee (appointed by Mr. Clinton) who joined the lists after he switched his superdelegate allegiance from Mrs. Clinton to Mr. Obama just before the primary in his home state, Indiana.

Mr. Richardson, the former energy secretary and United Nations ambassador under President Clinton who endorsed Mr. Obama after leaning toward Mrs. Clinton, said, “I know they’re unhappy, but I’ve been on these lists before.”

While Mrs. Clinton has a short list of people who disappointed her, Mr. Clinton, who reportedly has an encyclopedic memory of all the people he has helped, employed or appointed over the years, apparently has a far longer one, the campaign officials said.

Federal Reserve Chairman may Raise Interest Rates to Stop Inflation

If the Fed raises interest rates to stop inflation that will worsen the recession. It's been tried before in the 70s and 80s and always led to a downturn in the economy:

Ramping up his tough anti-inflation talk, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is raising expectations on Wall Street and elsewhere that the central bank could boost interest rates sooner than anticipated if high oil and food costs threaten to spur a broader bout of spiraling prices.

Over the past week, Bernanke has been sounding the alarm ever louder about the threat of inflation.

In his latest remarks on Monday evening, Bernanke played down the May spike in the nation's unemployment rate, saying the danger that the economy has fallen into a "substantial downturn" has faded.

At the same time, Bernanke sent a fresh warning that the Fed will be on heightened alert against inflation dangers, especially any signs that investors, consumers and businesses think prices will keep going up and change their behavior in ways that will aggravate inflation.

The Fed "will strongly resist an erosion of longer-term inflation expectations, as an unanchoring of those expectations would be destabilizing for growth as well as for inflation," Bernanke said.

The Fed chief and his colleagues have been signaling that the Fed's rate-cutting campaign, started in September, is probably over given mounting concerns about inflation. And, little by little, Bernanke is preparing people for the prospects of higher rates down the road.

Christian Leaders meet Privately with Obama

This is another reason why McCain will lose in November. The religious right doesn't like the Republican nominee and are sympathetic to the more religious Obama:

Barack Obama discussed Darfur, the Iraq war, gay rights, abortion and other issues Tuesday with Christian leaders, including conservatives who have been criticized for praising the Democratic presidential candidate.

Bishop T.D. Jakes, a prominent black clergyman who heads a Dallas megachurch, said Obama took questions, listened to participants and discussed his "personal journey of faith."

The discussion "went absolutely everywhere," Jakes told The Associated Press, and "just about every Christian stripe was represented in that room."

Jakes, who does not endorse candidates and said he also hopes to meet with Republican presidential candidate John McCain, said some participants clearly have political differences with Obama. The senator's support for abortion rights and gay rights, among other issues, draws opposition from religious conservatives. Some conservatives have criticized Jakes for praising Obama.

Bush Threatens Iran Over Nuclear Program, Regrets Iraq War Tough Talk

Bush, and his neocon handlers, have never given up their plan to bomb Iran. It still might happen but it looks like it is less likely. The Europeans won't help. They are keeping their distance from a radioactive U.S. President:

President Bush threatened Iran on Wednesday with more sanctions if it fails to stop enriching uranium and said all options were on the table to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Bush, who met German Chancellor Angela Merkel north of Berlin during a week-long tour of Europe, is pressing allies to agree new punitive measures against Iran.

While Europeans have voiced support for such a move, they are also looking past Bush, whose presidency ends in January.

"Both the chancellor and my first choice of course is to solve this diplomatically," Bush told a joint news conference with Merkel.

But he added: "All options are on the table," a reference to the threat of military action to stop Iran's nuclear program, which the West fears is aimed at making atomic bombs. "The message to the Iranian government is very clear," Bush said.

It is ironic that he is talking trash with Iran because he now admits that the same language he used prior to the Iraq war was a mistake:

Bush remains unpopular in western Europe more than five years after he clashed with Germany, France, Russia and others over the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

He told reporters in Meseberg he had no regrets about going to war to oust Saddam Hussein but admitted he could have been smarter in making the case for the U.S.-led invasion.

"I could have used better rhetoric to indicate that one, we tried to exhaust diplomacy in Iraq, and two, that I don't like war," Bush said. "But, no, the decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision."

Democrats' Windfall Oil Tax Plan Fails in Senate Vote

Once again the Congress fails to provide relief to a nation that is besieged by an economic crisis:

Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.

GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly.

The Democratic energy package would have imposed a 25 percent tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies, which together made $36 billion during the first three months of the year. It also would have given the government more power to address oil market speculation, opened the way for antitrust actions against countries belonging to the OPEC oil cartel, and made energy price gouging a federal crime.

"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. He said they want Congress to do something about oil company profits and the "orgy of speculation" on oil markets.

But Republican leaders said the Democrats' plan would do harm rather than good -- and they kept the legislation from being brought up for debate and amendments.

Ron Paul Plans Rally Near Republican Convention

If things weren't looking bad enough for the Republicans. Now they will face the kind of disruption at their convention which for a while was feared by the Democrats:

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is planning a daylong rally in Minnesota during the Republican National Convention that could draw attention from the presumed nominee John McCain.

The Texas congressman with a devoted following has tentatively reserved the Williams Arena at the University of Minnesota on Sept. 2, the second day of the GOP convention.

"We plan on having a large rally," said Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. "We want it to be a celebration of Republican values and what the Republican Party has traditionally stood for."

Benton also said Paul wants to send a message to the GOP "that we need to return to our roots" of limited government and personal responsibility.

The Republican Party will be gathering at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul for its four-day event that will end with McCain accepting his party's nomination.

- Related topic:
FOX Commentator Kristol: GOP Concerned McCain not Ready for Obama

FOX Commentator Kristol: GOP Concerned McCain not Ready for Obama

Kristol has good reason to believe McCain can't beat Obama. The main reason, even more than the fiasco in Iraq: the economy. McCain cannot win with an economy in such a weak state. Not to mention that he won't raise as much money as the Democratic Party nominee. This is the Transcript of the noted neocon's views on McCain's chances:

MEGYN KELLY, CO-HOST: Well, the general election is officially underway and some Republicans are downright worried about their candidate. They are concerned that the McCain campaign is not up to the task of facing Barack Obama. And when it comes to campaign presence, well, they see a bit of a charisma gap, underscored, and example, like this one.

[...]BILL KRISTOL WEEKLY STANDARD EDITOR: Well, you've got to laugh and you've got to cry a little bit. No, it is presentation and John McCain can hold his own against Barack Obama. I really believe that. The America people choose which of these two men should be president, despite Obama's skills, I think McCain has a very good chance to win.

But the Obama campaign has been so much more sophisticated and strategic than the McCain campaign. There are lots of Republicans I have talked to are concerned. They're not panicked. They're concerned.

I wrote this little column in the New York Times this morning and I've gotten an amazing number of e-mails and phone calls from people I don't know and people I haven't talked to in months, you know, saying, "Thank god someone said the truth," someone who is friendly to McCain said, look, he deserves a better campaign than he's had so far.

They're tactically not bad. You know, if this story coming out that Jim Johnson, who's heading the VP search for Obama has the sweetheart deals with countrywide, they go jumping on that. There are good staff guys at the McCain campaign. But where is the strategy? What is McCain's overall vision for the economy, even for foreign policy?

Obama Economic Tax Stimulus Plan Unveiled in North Carolina

Economic recovery will require more than just tax cuts. We need major overhaul with an economic system/strategy that has been dysfunctional for decades. This from Time Magazine:

McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin tried over the weekend to make the case that it's Obama who more closely resembles Bush because they're both big spenders. But it's hard to see that one sticking. If this election becomes a referendum on the recent performance of the U.S. economy, Obama wins and McCain loses. It's as simple as that.

Can Obama make this election a referendum on the U.S. economy? He's certainly going to try. If his speech in Raleigh, N.C., Monday afternoon was any indication, though, it's not going to be a slam dunk. It's clear that Obama's economic policies aren't a continuation of the Bush era. But what they are remains a hard-to-summarize mix of moderate Democratic standbys, populist silliness and the occasional truly visionary proposal. They haven't coalesced into anything you could really call a rallying cry. Not yet, at least.

[...]For now, he and his advisers are reciting the details of his three big short-term priorities: a new $50 billion stimulus program, much of it routed into extending unemployment insurance beyond the current 26-week limit and helping struggling state governments; a more aggressive foreclosure-prevention effort, with $10 billion in funding; and a tax cut for Americans making less than $150,000 a year — to be financed with tax increases on those making more than $150,000 a year.

These add up to what you could call the stock Democratic response to tough times. They're not necessarily bad ideas, but they're not what you could call new or transformative either. Obama throws in a few populist panders — he favors a windfall profits tax on oil companies (which could discourage investment in new energy resources), and says he would oppose raising the Social Security retirement age (which if phased in over a long enough period would be the fairest, most sensible way to ease some of the system's long-run funding challenges). Near the end of the speech, there was a hint of Obama's "yes, we can" vision: a plan to give $4,000 a year in tuition aid to college students who pledge themselves to community or national service after graduation.

You can see the internal tensions within the Obama campaign in this laundry list. His economic advisers are moderate, mostly free-market-oriented wonks. His campaign strategists would presumably love it if he breathed a bit more populist fire. And the candidate himself balances a lifelong devotion to progressive causes with what seems to be a pretty keen sense of the tradeoffs inherent in economics. All of which helps explain why, for the moment at least, Obama's most compelling economic argument remains the fact that, on the economy, John McCain sounds an awful lot like George Bush.

FDA Pulls Tomatoes in 17 States After Salmonella Outbreak

Another case in the where the government, especially under George Bush, failed to adequately inspect our food supply. The incompetence and indifference of this White House is nothing short of criminal neglect:

As Texas and the nation grapple with a major outbreak of potentially deadly salmonella poisoning from tomatoes, critics of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are blasting the agency for sluggishness in ensuring the safety of America's food supply.

This latest outbreak, which has sickened 23 people locally, is the third significant salmonella case in America this year.

The FDA's food watchdogs, internal critics contend, are in "a state of crisis" and have stood by as budget and staffing problems have eroded their power to inspect and regulate the expanding food industry.

The FDA, others note, is part of a dangerously fragmented food safety system of 15 agencies — a system challenged by garden variety germs and the spectre of food-targeted bioterrorism.

Despite the system's best efforts, foodborne illnesses continue to pose a significant health threat.

Last year, spinach contaminated with E. coli bacteria sickened 206 Americans, hospitalizing 100 and killing three. Salmonella infections, many of them food-related, afflicted 1.4 million people in 2007.

This year salmonella, which causes severe diarrhea and can be fatal for infants, the elderly and those with compromised immune systems, has been spread through tainted cantaloupes, dry cereal and tomatoes.

The current outbreak, believed to be linked to raw tomatoes of unknown origin, has affected 56 people in Texas — 14 in Harris County, five in Brazoria County and two each in Fort Bend and Galveston counties. Thirty-six New Mexico residents and 34 elsewhere in the country also became ill.

Inspections done once every decade!:

As the food industry has rapidly grown in the past 35 years, the study said, the FDA has cut inspections by 78 percent. Now, inspectors visit a given food manufacturing plant once a decade; no inspectors visit farms or retail sales outlets.

The Government Accountability Office, long critical of the FDA, says the agency is part of a fragmented food safety system involving multiple agencies and a welter of laws. The GAO has designated the system a matter of "high risk."

CBS Anchor Dan Rather Slams Corporate News

This is a major story that won't be covered by the corporate news establishment. One of their own is denouncing the journalistic establishment. Dan Rather, a major news figure for decades, is essentially blowing the whistle. This is some of what he had to say:

In our efforts to take back the American press for the American people, we are blessed this weekend with the gift of good timing. For anyone who may have been inclined to ask if there really is a problem with the news media, or wonder if the task of media reform is, indeed, an urgent one... recent days have brought an inescapable answer, from a most unlikely source.

A source who decided to tell everyone, quote, "what happened."

I know I can't be the first person this weekend to reference the recent book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, but, having interviewed him this past week, I think there are some very important points to be made from the things he says in his book, and the questions his statements raise.

I'm sure all of you took special notice of what he had to say about the role of the press corps, in the run-up to the war in Iraq. In the government's selling of the war, he said they were — or, I should say, we were "complicit enablers" and "overly deferential."

These are interesting statements, especially considering their source. As one tries to wrap one's mind around them, the phrase "cognitive dissonance" comes to mind.

The first reaction, a visceral one, is: Whatever his motives for saying these things, he's right — and we didn't need Scott McClellan to tell us so.

But the second reaction is: Wait a minute... I do remember at least some reporters, and some news organizations, asking tough questions — asking them of the president, of those in his administration, of White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer and — oh yes — of Scott McClellan himself, once he took over for Mr. Fleischer a few months after the invasion.

So how do we reconcile these competing reactions? Well, we need to pull back for what we in television call the wide shot.

If we look at the wide shot, we can see, in one corner of our screen, the White House briefing room filled with the White House press corps... and, filling the rest of the screen, the finite but disproportionately powerful universe that has become known as "mainstream media" — the newspapers and news programs, real and alleged, that employ these White House correspondents — the news organizations that are, in turn, owned by a shockingly few, much larger corporations, for which news is but a miniscule part of their overall business interests.

Senator Feinstein: Clinton Won Popular Vote

Obviously this knucklehead didn't get the message. This is the same kind of argument used to discredit George Bush. Never mind it's incorrect:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a backer of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) during the primary campaign, reiterated on ABC’s “This Week” that Clinton had won the popular vote — an assertion that is not accepted by Illinois Democrat Sen. Barack Obama’s camp and one that, if repeated often, could harm Democratic attempts to unify behind him.

“Hillary Clinton is well known, certainly she had the popular vote in this election,” she said, according to a transcript. “That is something and that is something tremendous. Now, I believe the [vice presidential] nomination is up to him. I can't tell him what to do. Nobody else can tell him what to do. All I can say is I agree with [Pennsylvania Gov.] Ed Rendell, that if you really want a winning ticket, this is it.”

The famously late-arriving Clinton showed up for a Thursday meeting with Obama thirty minutes early, said Feinstein, who hosted the chat at her home. Obama was delayed and was about thirty minutes late.
Feinstein said that while they waited, she and Clinton “sat in the living room and we talked a little bit, and she expressed to me the depth of her concern and caring, the fact that she had 18 million people who put their hopes and dreams in her ability to create new opportunities for people. She wants to continue that. She recognizes that it's over, and I think every instinct in Hillary Clinton is to help.”

The comment is obviously an attempt to get Hillar on the ticket:

Feinstein went on to make the case for Clinton as Obama’s running mate. “I think she has a movement. Trust me, from the e-mails I've been getting and people in California have been sending me, trust me, there is a movement. And it's formed from a number of different perspectives.

Speech Transcript: Hillary Clinton Endorses Barack Obama

Finally Hillary does the right thing and concedes defeat to Barack Obama. Read the complete transcript:

The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama, the next president of the United States.

(APPLAUSE)

Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.

(APPLAUSE)

And I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me.

(APPLAUSE)

I have served in the Senate with him for four years. I have been in this campaign with him for 16 months. I have stood on the stage and gone toe-to-toe with him in 22 debates. I've had a front-row seat to his candidacy, and I have seen his strength and determination, his grace and his grit.

In his own life, Barack Obama has lived the American dream, as a community organizer, in the State Senate, as a United States senator. He has dedicated himself to ensuring the dream is realized. And in this campaign, he has inspired so many to become involved in the democratic process and invested in our common future.

Now, when I started this race, I intended to win back the White House and make sure we have a president who puts our country back on the path to peace, prosperity and progress. And that's exactly what we're going to do, by ensuring that Barack Obama walks through the doors of the Oval Office on January 20, 2009.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, I understand -- I understand that we all know this has been a tough fight, but the Democratic Party is a family. And now it's time to restore the ties that bind us together and to come together around the ideals we share, the values we cherish, and the country we love.

We may have started on separate journeys, but today our paths have merged. And we're all heading toward the same destination, united and more ready than ever to win in November and to turn our country around, because so much is at stake.

We all want an economy that sustains the American dream, the opportunity to work hard and have that work rewarded, to save for college, a home and retirement, to afford that gas and those groceries, and still have a little left over at the end of the month, an economy that lifts all of our people and ensures that our prosperity is broadly distributed and shared.

It's curious that she didn't mention McCain:

It is this belief, this optimism that Senator Obama and I share and that has inspired so many millions of our supporters to make their voices heard. So today I am standing with Senator Obama to say: Yes, we can!

(APPLAUSE)

And that together we will work -- we'll have to work hard to achieve universal health care. But on the day we live in an America where no child, no man, and no woman is without health insurance, we will live in a stronger America. That's why we need to help elect Barack Obama our president.

Richard Clarke: White House Lied About WMDs in Iraq

Richard Clarke was the terrorism expert early in Bush administration before he was forced out. He appeared on Countdown and describes some of the sinister events leading up to the Iraq War. He also goes after John McCain. Here's the full transcript:

CLARKE: There certainly are and this is a big report. What it says is statements by the president were not substantiated by intelligence. And then it says statements by the president were contradicted by available intelligence. In other words, they made things up. And they made them up and gave them to Colin Powell and others who believed them.

I think Colin Powell did not know he was lying, but he was. He was given intelligence that people in the intelligence community at the time knew were not true. This is not a case of 20/20 hindsight. This is a case of what was available then. The National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction was read by seven senators before they voted to go to war. And one was the chairman of the intelligence committee, Bob Graham, who read it and went to the floor of the Senate and said, I read it. I‘m chairman of the Intelligence Committee. It‘s not persuasive. There‘s not a good case here for this war.

So people had the opportunity at the time, if they were reading the intelligence that was available to them. And to say that this is only something that we could have known years later, it‘s just not true.

OLBERMANN: We knew about Senator Graham‘s doubts. We already knew about the dissident intel agencies, the doubts about the aluminum tubes were instantaneous, the doubts about the clandestine meetings in Germany that never happened. What are we to make now, in the light of the political realities of today, of Senator McCain‘s undiminished enthusiasm for and defense of war, and specifically this remarkable claim that every intel assessment of the time was screaming WMD?

CLARKE: Senator McCain‘s statements are contradicted by the facts too, the facts in a Senate report, the facts that Republican senators voted for. He is a big proponent of the war but he is also now justifying the intelligence claims of the president, which now we have the evidence, we have the proof, four years too late, that those statements were flat-out wrong. And these weren‘t close calls. They made things up.

OLBERMANN: It‘s hard really to recreate in our minds just how trusting most Democrats were and most Americans were, how the media truly was in a patriotic rallying behind the president after 9/11. Does the context of that in any way change the way we should be thinking about this report today?

CLARKE: Keith, the fact that 80, 90 percent of the American people supported the president, that we were all wanting it do something about 9/11, doesn‘t change the legal responsibilities of the Congress to do oversight. It doesn‘t change the legal responsibilities of the intelligence community to analyze and report the truth and very few of them did. One of them, the State Department Intelligence Community, the State Department Intelligence Bureau, was absolutely spot on. You never heard that at the time. You were never told that they were dissenting opinions.

Are you Next to Lose Your Home?

If you think it can't happen to you--think again. It's happening to celebrities. In fact, 1 in 11 mortgages are in trouble. That's a lot of Americans. The state of housing is the worst in 3 decades. What makes it so frightening is that many of those families in trouble are having to choose between driving or keeping their homes. Homeowners are having to make extremely difficult choices. This fact is reflected in skyrocketing bankruptcies.

The Congress is proposing legislation that might help. But that might not come anytime soon:

The Bush administration has taken steps to help distressed homeowners. It has urged lenders to freeze rates for some homeowners and encouraged lenders to rework mortgage terms so troubled borrowers can stay in their homes.

A congressional plan that includes a foreclosure prevention program has stalled as lawmakers figure out how to pay for it.

The government would back as much as $300 billion in new loans to help certain borrowers refinance into cheaper, fixed-rate loans. Mortgage holders would have to agree to take a substantial loss on the existing loans; borrowers would have to show they could afford the new mortgage and share future proceeds with the government.

The House passed its version last month. Senate leaders say they want to vote by July.

That problem is that it might be too little too late. America is drowning in debt and might not have the resources to pay for the most basic necessities much less a mortgage.

McCain ABC/Gibson Interview Transcript (6-5-08)

Read the transcript of John McCain's interview with Charles Gibson of ABC news:

GIBSON: He said on Tuesday night, when he was in Minneapolis, or St. Paul, he said, "John McCain has served this country heroically. I honor that service and I respect his many accomplishments, even if he chooses to deny mine."

Do you think he's qualified to be president?

MCCAIN: Oh, I think that's a judgment that the American people will make. It's not up to me to say that. It's up to me to point out that I have the experience and the knowledge and the judgment, and the right kind of change and the right kind of record, but most importantly a plan of action for the future.

Look, the Democratic Party has just determined that Senator Obama is qualified. Now it'll be up to the American people, and I'm sure that they judge both of us as qualified. I think that it's going to be a question of who's more qualified or the most qualified.

GIBSON: What kind of a relationship do you go into this election with him, having with him? You had a very testy exchange of letters a couple of years ago.

MCCAIN: Yes, once we had an exchange -- I had a letter to him over an issue. In fact, it had to do with ethics and lobbying reform. But I've always had a cordial relationship with Senator Obama. I didn't know him as well as I know Senator Clinton, and I hadn't worked with him as much as I had Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton and I were both on the Armed Services Committee.

But we've always had a cordial and respectful relationship. And I'll do everything I can to maintain that during this campaign. Americans are tired of the partisanship or the fighting of the -- impugning of character.

They want a real debate here, and that's why I challenged him -- or invited him, is a better word -- for us to do a series of 10 town hall meetings across this country, one a week between now and the Democratic convention. And let's start next week at Federal Hall in New York.

And, you know, I think the town hall meeting is the essence of democracy. Why not let people come and ask us both questions? I think that's what it's about. I think, from my own experience, that town hall meetings are more beneficial both to the candidate, as well as the voter.

GIBSON: Senator Obama, when we talked to him yesterday, said he was going to accept. He said, "Senator McCain has generously offered to me to start next week." He said, "I just got the nomination, and I think that's a little premature," but indicated that he was certainly interested in doing some of those.

It sounds to me like you both, actually, in these town meetings think that you've got the other guy on your turf.

McCain Speech Transcript: (6-3-08): I'm no Bush

Read the entire transcript:

The right change recognizes that many of the policies and institutions of our government have failed. They have failed to keep up with the challenges of our time because many of these policies were designed for the problems and opportunities of the mid to late 20th Century, before the end of the Cold War; before the revolution in information technology and rise of the global economy. The right kind of change will initiate widespread and innovative reforms in almost every area of government policy — health care, energy, the environment, the tax code, our public schools, our transportation system, disaster relief, government spending and regulation, diplomacy, the military and intelligence services. Serious and far-reaching reforms are needed in so many areas of government to meet our own challenges in our own time.

[...]You will hear from my opponent's campaign in every speech, every interview, every press release that I'm running for President Bush's third term. You will hear every policy of the President described as the Bush-McCain policy. Why does Senator Obama believe it's so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he knows it's very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false. So he tries to drum it into your minds by constantly repeating it rather than debate honestly the very different directions he and I would take the country. But the American people didn't get to know me yesterday, as they are just getting to know Senator Obama. They know I have a long record of bipartisan problem solving. They've seen me put our country before any President — before any party — before any special interest -- before my own interest. They might think me an imperfect servant of our country, which I surely am. But I am her servant first, last and always.

Obama AIPAC Speech Transcript (6-4-08)

This speech before the powerful pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC) is a perfect example of why things won't change in Washington if Obama is elected. No candidate can run for office, much less be elected, without swearing allegiance to the State of Israel. This means more war in the Middle East regardless of who is elected President. Read the entire transcript:

One of the many things that I admire about AIPAC is that you fight for this common cause from the bottom up. The lifeblood of AIPAC is here in this room — grass-roots activists of all ages, from all parts of the country, who come to Washington year after year to make your voices heard. Nothing reflects the face of AIPAC more than the 1,200 students who have traveled here to make it clear to the world that the bond between Israel and the United States is rooted in more than our shared national interests — it's rooted in the shared values and shared stories of our people. And as president, I will work with you to ensure that this bond is strengthened.

[...]Our alliance is based on shared interests and shared values. Those who threaten Israel threaten us. Israel has always faced these threats on the front lines. And I will bring to the White House an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security.

That starts with ensuring Israel's qualitative military advantage. I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat — from Gaza to Tehran. Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As president, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade — investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO. And I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world.