Picking Edwards Gives Kerry a Boost-Poll Reuters.com

The Kerry-Edwards ticket is leading Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney by a margin of six percentage points, 51 percent to 45 percent, the poll said.

The survey of 1,001 adults, to be published in the July 19 issue of the magazine, was taken July 8-9 and has a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points.

It was the first Newsweek poll since Kerry chose the North Carolina lawmaker as his running mate on July 6. Kerry led Bush 46 percent to 45 percent in the magazine’s previous survey in mid-May.

But in a three-way race with independent candidates Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo, Kerry-Edwards edged Bush-Cheney by a slimmer margin, just 47 percent to 44 percent. Nader-Camejo drew support from 3 percent of those polled.

The poll comes amid speculation Cheney may be hurting Bush’s chances of winning re-election. Cheney has been a lighting rod for Democratic criticism because of his role in advocating for the invasion of Iraq and his previous ties with energy company Halliburton, which is being probed for overcharging for its services in Iraq.

Cheney has distanced himself from any claims that he has a financial stake in Halliburton, and Bush has strongly endorsed the vice president as his running mate.

However, the Newsweek poll said that if Bush replaced Cheney with Secretary of State Colin Powell, the ticket would defeat Kerry-Edwards by 53 percent to 44 percent.

News Hounds: We watch FOX so you don’t have to.

Meet the News Hounds
We’re eight middle-aged citizens who believe a viable democracy depends upon viable media. Read more in our manifesto.

OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism

Outfoxed examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, have been running a “race to the bottom” in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public’s right to know.

NPR : Poll: Bush Rural Support Fades in Key States

Respondents in the Center for Rural Strategies poll give the president a nine-point lead over Democrat John Kerry in rural portions of the battleground states. Mr. Bush was favored by 51 percent of respondents, compared to 42 percent for Kerry. But the same people said they gave candidate Bush a margin twice as big against his Democratic rival four years ago — 55 percent said that they voted for Bush, 37 percent for Al Gore. (In the final election results from 2000, Bush won 55.5 percent of the vote in rural counties in the 17 states, while Gore captured 44.5 percent.)

Close to half of the respondents, 48 percent, say the nation is on the wrong track, while 43 percent say it’s heading in the right direction.

Bush in West Virginia for Fourth

A couple from Texas was taken out of a speech given by President Bush in West Virginia Sunday.

Police placed Nicole and Jeffery Rank of Corpus Christi in restraints after they entered the event with a ticket and then removed their clothes to reveal anti-Bush T-shirts, according to the acting director of the Capitol police in Charleston.

He said the two were asked to go out to the designated protest area, but refused.

Bush came to West Virginia on the nation’s 228th birthday….

About 6,500 people packed into the Capitol’s north courtyard to hear him.

As police rushed her out, Nicole Rank shouted that they were told they couldn’t be there because they were wearing anti-Bush shirts.

Police say the two were issued citations for trespassing and released.

Remember when all of America was a ”free-speech zone”? mjh

Rooftop Revolt — Overthrow Bush

Secrecy and the Bush Administration
By Ben Carlson, alibi

Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a memo to government agencies in October of 2001 urging that FOIA requests be rejected whenever possible, using the vaguest reasoning possible. Ashcroft then assured federal agencies that the Department of Justice “will defend your decisions.”

In November 2001, President Bush effectively signed the 1978 Presidential Records Act out of existence. Executive Order 13233 granted former presidents, their heirs, and sitting presidents the right to veto the release of presidential documents to the public. In one fell stroke, Bush freed the supreme executive from public scrutiny of his records. (The 1978 law required their release after 12 years — a reaction to Nixon’s secretiveness.)
Even information that was already released or slated for release fell prey to the federal government’s hostility to disclosure. …

Without offering an explanation, Bush delayed the declassification of millions of documents in March 2003 and gave FOIA officers greater freedom to reclassify information that had already been released. …

A Brief History of the Freedom of Information Act

Growing efforts to pry open the doors of the government finally came to fruition in 1966, after JFK’s notoriously closed-door presidency. Public outcry had reached such a pitch by that time that President Johnson had little choice but to sign the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on July Fourth. (He still managed to drag his heels, though; he dodged the press cycle by signing it late at night on his Texas ranch.)

Since 1966, FOIA has varied in strength depending on the compliance of each administration. Nixon’s, naturally, was a low point, though his stonewalling led to the strengthening of FOIA (a weak bill initially) under Gerald Ford. In the ’80s, Reagan attempted to scale it back, complaining that FOIA had become too expensive—an ironic point, considering that he spent more on Pentagon marching bands at the time.

Presidential compliance reached its zenith under Clinton, who issued a memo declaring his commitment to “enhancing [FOIA’s] effectiveness in my administration.” Attorney General Janet Reno further asserted a “presumption of disclosure” in matters of FOIA. Their words became action in 1996, when Clinton approved the expansion of FOIA rights to the Net, requiring agencies to post the most frequently requested information online.

For the complete guide [to filing FOIA requests} and agency addresses, go to http://archive.aclu.org/library/foia.html

In the local paper or on local news, I have seen nothing about the controversy surrounding an interview conducted by Carole Coleman, of Irish Public Television, with Bush. This interview was a week ago and the blogosphere is boiling. Thanks to Jas. for the heads-up. mjh

Interview of the President by Radio and Television Ireland (official White House transcript)

Pampered Bush Meets A Real Reporter by John Nichols

Carole Coleman, Washington correspondent for RTE, the Irish public television network … is a mainstream European journalist who has conducted interviews with top officials from a number of countries — her January interview with Secretary of State Colin Powell was apparently solid enough to merit posting on the State Department’s Web site.

Unfortunately, it appears that Coleman failed to receive the memo informing reporters that they are supposed to treat this president with kid gloves. Instead, she confronted him as any serious journalist would a world leader.

She asked tough questions about the mounting death toll in Iraq, the failure of U.S. planning, and European opposition to the invasion and occupation. And when the president offered the sort of empty and listless “answers” that satisfy the White House press corps — at one point, he mumbled, “My job is to do my job” — she tried to get him focused by asking precise follow-up questions.

The president complained five times during the course of the interview about the pointed nature of Coleman’s questions and follow-ups — “Please, please, please, for a minute, OK?” the hapless Bush pleaded at one point, as he demanded his questioner go easy on him.

After the interview was done, a Bush aide told the Irish Independent newspaper that the White House was concerned that Coleman had “overstepped the bounds of politeness.”

As punishment, the White House canceled an exclusive interview that had been arranged for RTE with first lady Laura Bush.

Did Coleman step out of line? Of course not. Watch the interview (it’s available on the www.rte.ie Web site) and you will see that Coleman was neither impolite nor inappropriate. She was merely treating Bush as European and Canadian journalists do prominent political players. In Western democracies such as Ireland, reporters and politicians understand that it is the job of journalists to hold leaders accountable.

A Reporter Finally Stands Up To Bush… No, sorry, not an American; So he files a complaint with her embassy and cancels another, already scheduled interview with Laura Bush… What a surprise!

The White House filed a complaint with the Irish Embassy in Washington over RTE journalist Carole Coleman’s interview with US President George Bush. …

Ms. Coleman, undeterred by the level of bovine excrement, presses on by correctly pointing out that most people find life today more dangerous than they did before Bush came to power. She points out that every day there is some terrorist news, while four years ago, it was always isolated incidents. Mr. Bush, then asks her what was it like on 9-11, and when she has the audacity to start to answer, he again cuts her off by saying “you ask the questions and I’ll answer them if you don’t mind.” What??? Hm, Mr. President, you JUST ASKED HER A QUESTION! Nevertheless, he continued and wouldn’t let her answer. The President rattled off a litany of bombings, all of which had one thing in common, they all had nothing to do with Iraq. Ms. Coleman correctly points this out and says that we feel less safe because Bush has taken the focus off al Qaeda and placed it on Iraq, a very astute point. …

If it is not completely under their control, they simply change the rules until it is. In this interview Bush lied about Abu Ghraib being a result of the actions of a few soldiers, that Saddam had WMD, that Saddam didn’t disarm, that he had the capacity to make weapons, that by blowing up Iraq and bringing democracy to it; terrorism will stop, that he has provided 15 billion to Africa for AIDS, that outside of France, Europe supports the Iraq war, and that he is leading in the face of terror by invading Iraq. That is a lot if lies and misdirection for a 12 minute interview.

On the truth side of the ledger, we see that Mr. Bush does not play fair with open inquiries, [and] that he then is punitive when someone has dared to question him honestly….

The Pluck of the Irish (washingtonpost.com)

The preceding link also has a link to the latest Wall Street Journal poll.

47 percent of Americans believe Bush deliberately misled people to make the case for war with Iraq, compared to 44 percent who think he gave the most accurate information he had. Back in March, it was 53-41 in favor of giving him the benefit to the doubt.

In case you want a taste of the right wing response (and more Republican obscenities) follow this next link. mjh

IRISH FREEPers! Contact info for rude RTE Reporter