Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Voucher Program Puts D.C.

Posted By: Kids at Risk, Study Says on 2009-01-06
In Reply to: School vouchers would even the playing field. - MTMom





LINK/URL: WaPo story


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

That's not how the voucher system works.
You don't send your kid to a "voucher school." You get a tax credit to help offset the cost of private school. Because, guess what, THEY'RE BETTER! They're actually held accountable. In high schools here in Florida, you don't even need a teaching degree! You just have to have gotten a BA in something. Anything. That's effing pathetic. My daughter's BIOLOGY teacher was a TAX ACCOUNTANT, who did little more than pop video tapes into the TV set so the kids would leave her alone so she could eat her box of Slim Fast bars and read Soap Opera Digest. THAT'S the public school system, and it stinks to high heaven.

People who protest against vouchers do so because it suits their political agenda, NOT because they are thinking about what's best for the kids.

"Voucher programs have also inspired enormous opposition, primarily from the education establishment and on the political Left. Union officials and public educators tend to see vouchers as a threat because they empower parents rather than school boards to decide where a child goes to school. The Left views vouchers as the conservatives’ way of introducing competition into public education as a whole, and as a means of promoting the privatization such programs as Social Security and replacing many others with free market initiatives. In addition, since most (85 percent) of the private voucher schools serving low-income students are religious (and mostly Catholic), vouchers inspire stiff resistance from those who believe in a strict separation of church and state. " ~ from http://stats.org/stories/2008/tes_scores_vouchers_oct20_08.html
Don't forget the Milwaukee voucher mess
From 2005:

An investigation this June by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel found problems in some voucher schools that—even to those numb to educational horror stories—break one's heart. No matter how severe one's criticisms of the Milwaukee Public Schools, nothing is as abysmal as the conditions at some voucher schools.

Some of them had high school graduates teaching students. Some were nothing more than refurbished, cramped storefronts. Some did not have any discernable curriculum and only a few books. Some did not teach evolution or anything else that might conflict with a literal interpretation of the Bible.

At one school, teacher and students were on their way to McDonald's. At another, lights were turned off to save money. A third used the back alley as a playground.

One school is located in an old leather factory, another in a former tire store, a third is above a vacuum cleaner shop and hair salon.

As one of the reporters said, "I think we expected from the start to see some strong schools and some weak ones. But seeing firsthand the effect that troubled schools can have on children's futures and lives was disturbing."

Overall, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel estimated that about 10 percent of the schools visited demonstrate "alarming deficiencies" without "the ability, resources, knowledge or will to offer children even a mediocre education."

That's a cautious estimate. First of all, reporters made pre-arranged visits, giving schools time to put their best faces forward. Second, nine of the program's 115 schools —an additional 8 percent—refused to allow reporters in.

http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/voucher_report/v_free201.shtml
Please try to De-program
Please try to change your mind set from the negative programming of the campaign.  The whole world is able to celebrate that America has chosen a man of integrity and intelligence to be our leader.  Believe me things are going to be so much better now that we have at the helm a thinking person who has the people's interest as his guiding principle.  Just as he surrounded himself with the best and brightest to organize and run an honorable and successful campaign, he will use those same resources to bring our nation to honor and success...President-elect Obama's success is all of our success 
It puts you
at the top of my list of level-headed Christians from whom the rest of the party/religion could learn a thing or two, & that is no lie.

I am quite reassured to know that there are some very religious people out there who still manage to separate church & state. I wish there were more of you, or at least, more who were willing to insist that this view be part & parcel of the Republican party. If there were, I'd still be a Republican, but I left the party long ago because of its exclusionary principles.




Still, nobody puts a gun to their heads

and makes them sign on the dotted line.  You can always change your phone number and address.


Personaly, I don't believe much of that crap you're posting is true.  I know recruiters can be persistent, but all this conspiracy theory is just that, conspiracy.


Bush puts name to everything...sm

















Americas
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/grey.gif




















src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif





The Times March 24, 2006






src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,281993,00.jpg
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif


Bush puts name to everything


src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif






President Bush has become the longest-sitting President since Thomas Jefferson — who occupied the White House between 1801 to 1809 — not to exercise his veto, surpassing James Monroe.










Monroe had been in office for 1,888 days before he vetoed his first Bill on May 4, 1822. Jefferson, America’s third president, never exercised his veto.

Yesterday was Mr Bush’s 1,889th day in office. Congress has sent him 1,091 Bills and he has signed them all. His refusal to wield the veto has angered fiscal conservatives. They have become dismayed by his failure to block legislation stuffed with “pork barrel” special interest projects, at a time of growing national debt and runaway spending.

Last month Mr Bush threatened to veto legislation aimed at blocking a sale of US port operations to a Dubai company. He was saved from a showdown after the company sold that part of its interests to a US entity.

Ronald Reagan vetoed 78 Bills, and Bill Clinton 36.


SCHIP program
First, let's get the story straight. Republicans are not voting against Childrens Health Care. The SCHIP program has been in effect for several years, and Republicans DID vote to start the program. And like most government-run programs it is wasteful and was not administered properly. Millions of illegals' children are enrolled in the program, taking funds that should go to American children. That is one of the things Republicans want watched before expanding the program. Expansion might not be necessary to the tune of 6 billion if the illegals got taken off. All the Republicans asked was that the Democrats extend the program for another 6 months as it stands now (they NEVER voted to stop it completely) and work on a solution to remove illegals and make sure no more illegals get on, etc. This has never been about voting against health care for children. They are not voting to stop SCHIP, just tighten it up. Of course, because of the liberal bias of media, all you see are headlines saying BUSH TO VETO CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN and REPUBLICANS WANT TO STOP CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN. Both of these are lies. The 'socialized medicine' comment, I believe, was directed toward the Democrat plan to stop all private health care and make the whole thing government run. And when they do that, the quality of health care will tank and the ability to get superior medical care for catastrophic incidents, high-risk surgery, etc., will drop dramatically. Ask Canada. Ask why Canadians come to the US for that kind of care? Because they don't want to be on government waiting lists for months/years. Do some research. It HAPPENS. Socialized medicine hurts the middle class and poor, because richer folks can still pay cash and get the higher standard of care. Believe me, folks, we don't need socialized medicine in this country.

As I have stated in other posts, tighten up the SCHIP program to exclude illegals and monitor the program properly so that it does what it is designed to do...provide health care for American children whose parents cannot afford to buy it. Look at all social programs here (fraught with waste), tighten them up, and prioritize. Put Childrens Health care at the top of the pile. Use common sense, like American families have to do inidividually. We know we can't provide everything for our families we would like to, so we have to prioritize, to make sure the most important things are taken care of first. Government should run the same way. If government is going to provide health care for kids (and I believe if we are going to have social programs that one should be FIRST), then do so, and make that the FIRST priority of social spending. If that cuts into lesser needed programs, so be it. First things first. If we do not start being fiscally responsible with spending, we are going to dig ourselves into a hole. The more people who get on assistance and do not pay into the tax system, the bigger the burden is on the rest of us who do have to work and pay taxes. Personally I think 35-40% off the top of my wages is enough. I think the government just has to prioritize and be more careful about the way they spend it.

Just my two cents.
Oh, get with the program! Its "patriotic"
nm
I will bet that he puts his pants on one
DH does! He really is JUST A MAN, his s**t stinks just like the homeless beggars hanging around DC. He really is JUST A MAN. This isn't even humorous any more, just beyond anything I have ever heard. He will never be "one of us", he has himself on too high a podium to drop to some peon's level.
Here's a summary of the program

 


Making Home Affordable will offer assistance to as many as 7 to 9 million homeowners, making their mortgages more affordable and helping to prevent the destructive impact of foreclosures on families, communities and the national economy.


The Home Affordable Refinance program will be available to 4 to 5 million homeowners who have a solid payment history on an existing mortgage owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Normally, these borrowers would be unable to refinance because their homes have lost value, pushing their current loan-to-value ratios above 80%. Under the Home Affordable Refinance program, many of them will now be eligible to refinance their loan to take advantage of today’s lower mortgage rates or to refinance an adjustable-rate mortgage into a more stable mortgage, such as a 30-year fixed rate loan.


GSE lenders and servicers already have much of the borrower’s information on file, so documentation requirements are not likely to be burdensome. In addition, in some cases an appraisal will not be necessary. This flexibility will make the refinance quicker and less costly for both borrowers and lenders. The Home Affordable Refinance program ends in June 2010.


The Home Affordable Modification program will help up to 3 to 4 million at-risk homeowners avoid foreclosure by reducing monthly mortgage payments. Working with the banking and credit union regulators, the FHA, the VA, the USDA and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Treasury Department today announced program guidelines that are expected to become standard industry practice in pursuing affordable and sustainable mortgage modifications. This program will work in tandem with an expanded and improved Hope for Homeowners program.


With the information now available, servicers can begin immediately to modify eligible mortgages under the Modification program so that at-risk borrowers can better afford their payments. The detailed guidelines (separate document) provide information on the following:


Eligibility and Verification


  • Loans originated on or before January 1, 2009.
  • First-lien loans on owner-occupied properties with unpaid principal balance up to $729,750. Higher limits allowed for owner-occupied properties with 2-4 units.
  • All borrowers must fully document income, including signed IRS 4506-T, two most recent pay stubs, and most recent tax return, and must sign an affidavit of financial hardship.
  • Property owner occupancy status will be verified through borrower credit report and other documentation; no investor-owned, vacant, or condemned properties.
  • Incentives to lenders and servicers to modify at risk borrowers who have not yet missed payments when the servicer determines that the borrower is at imminent risk of default.
  • Modifications can start from now until December 31, 2012; loans can be modified only once under the program.

    Loan Modification Terms and Procedures


  • Participating servicers are required to service all eligible loans under the rules of the program unless explicitly prohibited by contract; servicers are required to use reasonable efforts to obtain waivers of limits on participation.
  • Participating loan servicers will be required to use a net present value (NPV) test on each loan that is at risk of imminent default or at least 60 days delinquent. The NPV test will compare the net present value of cash flows with modification and without modification. If the test is positive – meaning that the net present value of expected cash flow is greater in the modification scenario – the servicer must modify absent fraud or a contract prohibition.
  • Parameters of the NPV test are spelled out in the guidelines, including acceptable discount rates, property valuation methodologies, home price appreciation assumptions, foreclosure costs and timelines, and borrower cure and redefault rate assumptions.
  • Servicers will follow a specified sequence of steps in order to reduce the monthly payment to no more than 31% of gross monthly income (DTI).
  • The modification sequence requires first reducing the interest rate (subject to a rate floor of 2%), then if necessary extending the term or amortization of the loan up to a maximum of 40 years, and then if necessary forbearing principal. Principal forgiveness or a Hope for Homeowners refinancing are acceptable alternatives.
  • The monthly payment includes principal, interest, taxes, insurance, flood insurance, homeowner’s association and/or condominium fees. Monthly income includes wages, salary, overtime, fees, commissions, tips, social security, pensions, and all other income.
  • Servicers must enter into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent on or before December 31, 2009.

    Payments to Servicers, Lenders, and Responsible Borrowers


  • The program will share with the lender/investor the cost of reductions in monthly payments from 38% DTI to 31% DTI.
  • Servicers that modify loans according to the guidelines will receive an up-front fee of $1,000 for each modification, plus “pay for success” fees on still-performing loans of $1,000 per year.
  • Homeowners who make their payments on time are eligible for up to $1,000 of principal reduction payments each year for up to five years.
  • The program will provide one-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 to servicers for modifications made while a borrower is still current on mortgage payments.
  • The program will include incentives for extinguishing second liens on loans modified under this program.
  • No payments will be made under the program to the lender/investor, servicer, or borrower unless and until the servicer has first entered into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent.
  • Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner refinances.

    Transparency and Accountability


  • Measures to prevent and detect fraud, such as documentation and audit requirements, will be central to the program.
  • Servicers will be required to collect, maintain and transmit records for verification and compliance review, including borrower eligibility, underwriting, incentive payments, property verification, and other documentation.
  • Freddie Mac will audit compliance.

  • That puts you in the 26% range...(sm)

    according to a recent poll asking the question of whether or not Americans felt safe with Obama.


    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/13/cnn-poll-obama-not-making-us-less-safe/


    Looks like you're still in the minority, a rather small one at that.


    That puts you in the 26% range...(sm)

    according to a recent poll asking the question of whether or not Americans felt safe with Obama.


    [Exert] "Seventy-two percent of those questioned in the poll released Monday disagree with Cheney's view that some of Obama's actions have put the country at greater risk, with 26 percent agreeing with the former vice president."


    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/13/cnn-poll-obama-not-making-us-less-safe/


    Looks like you're still in the minority, a rather small one at that.


    This is a debate not the Oprah program
    let's not get our feelings hurt and ruin a good debate. No one is siding with sexual offenders, not in the least... :)
    They have been quite vocal about their nuclear program
    as has been North Korea.  So who is lying?
    Vermont has a similar program. nm
    .
    I don't think that puts his reputation on the line
    If Obama gets elected and he is truly as bad as we think, then we will know God has brought the judgment on us. Serves us right too.

    God rarely answers when you try to bargain with him. Praying "prove to me by doing such and such" doesn't seem to bear much fruit from what I've seen. It should be "your will be done"

    Flame away.... ;)
    This how he puts his campaign coffers to their best use,
    oh brother
    It is words. When he puts that into action....
    I will begin to trust him. His actions will dictate what he meant by that...and if it was just words or sincerity. Since almost everything he is for I am against, I don't see how he could hear my voice, with all due respect. But time will tell. His actions will determine what he meant.
    As long as SP puts herself out there and threatens to
    she will draw volleys from the firing squad. Truth is that this relentless criticism is the best thing that can happen for the GOP, who needs to turn their eyes in a MUCH different direction when it comes to the leadership void. If they cannot move themselves more toward the center, they are doomed to fail again.
    But that still doesn't say WHY smokers should pay for this whole program?? sm
    You are taxing 20% (at most) of the nation to pay for this program. IT'S NOT FAIR - tax junk food, soda, sugar products to spread it around.
    SCHIP Program. Venting again.

    Sorry, I'm still venting from the SCHIP garbage that was on today. They absolutely want to pass this immediately without looking at amendments, etc. They want an additional 11 million children covered ( nothing wrong with that) EXCEPT they want to put it on the smokers to pay for it. Now, with the way they are trying to get smokers to quit, I would think that's a stupid and absolutely wrong idea.


    Like James Webb (NC) stated, "Do we really want an unhealthy habit to pay for a healthy habit?"What happens when the smokers quit because of all the taxes they have to pay to keep these programs going? Who is going to pay for it if every smoker quits? You have nothing to back it up. There would be a black hole and eventually, every citizen would have to pay for it.


    I agree totally with his statements.  Why is it they expect an unhealthy habit to cover healthy habits? It makes no sense. At least this rep has his head together, yet the others don't think about the future costs.


    When are the  American citizens going to wake up and start thinking for themselves? Why, oh why, do we keep voting in people who don't even think for themselves, just vote by party affiliation?


    Glenn Beck stated we have to keep the phone lines to Washington and keep calling in to our reps to stop the nonsense (sp). I agree.


    I watched the jerk put in the Senate by fellow voters from my state today and I had to turn him off  (I didn't vote for him-he knows nothing). I am going to write to the newspapers in that area and ask them WHY did they vote for him? Betcha my answer will be "He gave us so much money to get our projects done." "He's the son of our late governor." "He's from our area." That's no reason to vote for somebody. If it is, then I must be totally wrong for voting the way I do. I vote who I think will do the best job, not if he's from our area. That's part of  the problem with politics today.


    I'll get off my  now. Thanks for reading. I promise no more venting today.


     


    Cant trust anything Moore puts out there
    nm
    And I hope God puts some love and
    //
    Another Domestic Spying Program revealed

    The Other Big Brother
    The Pentagon has its own domestic spying program. Even its leaders say the outfit may have gone too far.


    By Michael Isikoff
    Newsweek


    Jan. 30, 2006 issue - The demonstration seemed harmless enough. Late on a June afternoon in 2004, a motley group of about 10 peace activists showed up outside the Houston headquarters of Halliburton, the giant military contractor once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. They were there to protest the corporation's supposed war profiteering. The demonstrators wore papier-mache masks and handed out free peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches to Halliburton employees as they left work. The idea, according to organizer Scott Parkin, was to call attention to allegations that the company was overcharging on a food contract for troops in Iraq. It was tongue-in-street political theater, Parkin says.


    But that's not how the Pentagon saw it. To U.S. Army analysts at the top-secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), the peanut-butter protest was regarded as a potential threat to national security. Created three years ago by the Defense Department, CIFA's role is force protection—tracking threats and terrorist plots against military installations and personnel inside the United States. In May 2003, Paul Wolfowitz, then deputy Defense secretary, authorized a fact-gathering operation code-named TALON—short for Threat and Local Observation Notice—that would collect raw information about suspicious incidents. The data would be fed to CIFA to help the Pentagon's terrorism threat warning process, according to an internal Pentagon memo.


    A Defense document shows that Army analysts wrote a report on the Halliburton protest and stored it in CIFA's database. It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention—although organizer Parkin had previously been arrested while demonstrating at ExxonMobil headquarters (the charges were dropped). But there are now questions about whether CIFA exceeded its authority and conducted unauthorized spying on innocent people and organizations. A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained. The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject.


    CIFA's activities are the latest in a series of disclosures about secret government programs that spy on Americans in the name of national security. In December, the ACLU obtained documents showing the FBI had investigated several activist groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and Greenpeace, supposedly in an effort to discover possible ecoterror connections. At the same time, the White House has spent weeks in damage-control mode, defending the controversial program that allowed the National Security Agency to monitor the telephone conversations of U.S. persons suspected of terror links, without obtaining warrants.


    Last Thursday, Cheney called the program vital to the country's defense against Al Qaeda. Either we are serious about fighting this war on terror or not, he said in a speech to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. But as the new information about CIFA shows, the scope of the U.S. government's spying on Americans may be far more extensive than the public realizes.


    It isn't clear how many groups and individuals were snagged by CIFA's dragnet. Details about the program, including its size and budget, are classified. In December, NBC News obtained a 400-page compilation of reports that detailed a portion of TALON's surveillance efforts. It showed the unit had collected information on nearly four dozen antiwar meetings or protests, including one at a Quaker meetinghouse in Lake Worth, Fla., and a Students Against War demonstration at a military recruiting fair at the University of California, Santa Cruz. A Pentagon spokesman declined to say why a private company like Halliburton would be deserving of CIFA's protection. But in the past, Defense Department officials have said that the force protection mission includes military contractors since soldiers and Defense employees work closely with them and therefore could be in danger.


    CIFA researchers apparently cast a wide net and had a number of surveillance methods—both secretive and mundane—at their disposal. An internal CIFA PowerPoint slide presentation recently obtained by William Arkin, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst who writes widely about military affairs, gives some idea how the group operated. The presentation, which Arkin provided to NEWSWEEK, shows that CIFA analysts had access to law-enforcement reports and sensitive military and U.S. intelligence documents. (The group's motto appears at the bottom of each PowerPoint slide: Counterintelligence 'to the Edge'.) But the organization also gleaned data from open source Internet monitoring. In other words, they surfed the Web.


    That may have been how the Pentagon came to be so interested in a small gathering outside Halliburton. On June 23, 2004, a few days before the Halliburton protest, an ad for the event appeared on houston.indymedia.org, a Web site for lefty Texas activists. Stop the war profiteers, read the posting. Bring out the kids, relatives, Dick Cheney, and your favorite corporate pigs at the trough as we will provide food for free.


    Four months later, on Oct. 25, the TALON team reported another possible threat to national security. The source: a Miami antiwar Web page. Website advertises protest planned at local military recruitment facility, the internal report warns. The database entry refers to plans by a south Florida group called the Broward Anti-War Coalition to protest outside a strip-mall recruiting office in Lauderhill, Fla. The TALON entry lists the upcoming protest as a credible threat. As it turned out, the entire event consisted of 15 to 20 activists waving a giant bush lied sign. No one was arrested. It's very interesting that the U.S. military sees a domestic peace group as a threat, says Paul Lefrak, a librarian who organized the protest.


    Arkin says a close reading of internal CIFA documents suggests the agency may be expanding its Internet monitoring, and wants to be as surreptitious as possible. CIFA has contracted to buy identity masking software that would allow the agency to create phony Web identities and let them appear to be located in foreign countries, according to a copy of the contract with Computer Sciences Corp. (The firm declined to comment.)


    Pentagon officials have broadly defended CIFA as a legitimate response to the domestic terror threat. But at the same time, they acknowledge that an internal Pentagon review has found that CIFA's database contained some information that may have violated regulations. The department is not allowed to retain information about U.S. citizens for more than 90 days—unless they are reasonably believed to have some link to terrorism, criminal wrongdoing or foreign intelligence. There was information that was improperly stored, says a Pentagon spokesman who was authorized to talk about the program (but not to give his name). It was an oversight. In a memo last week, obtained by NEWSWEEK, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England ordered CIFA to purge such information from its files—and directed that all Defense Department intelligence personnel receive refresher training on department policies.


    That's not likely to stop the questions. Last week Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee pushed for an inquiry into CIFA's activities and who it's watching. This is a significant Pandora's box [Pentagon officials] don't want opened, says Arkin. What we're looking at is hints of what they're doing. As far as the Pentagon is concerned, that means we've already seen too much.


    © 2006 Newsweek, Inc.


     


    Prosecutor Puts Bush in Spotlight
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/washington/11leak.html?hp&ex=1144728000&en=cfd85f2bec48b42b&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    April 11, 2006

    White House Memo

     

    With One Filing, Prosecutor Puts Bush in Spotlight



    WASHINGTON, April 10 — From the early days of the C.I.A. leak investigation in 2003, the Bush White House has insisted there was no effort to discredit Joseph C. Wilson IV, the man who emerged as the most damaging critic of the administration's case that Saddam Hussein was seeking to build nuclear weapons.


    But now White House officials, and specifically President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, have been pitched back into the center of the nearly three-year controversy, this time because of a prosecutor's court filing in the case that asserts there was a strong desire by many, including multiple people in the White House, to undermine Mr. Wilson.


    The new assertions by the special prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, have put administration officials on the spot in a way they have not been for months, as attention in the leak case seems to be shifting away from the White House to the pretrial procedural skirmishing in the perjury and obstruction charges against Mr. Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr.


    Mr. Fitzgerald's filing talks not of an effort to level with Americans but of a plan to discredit, punish or seek revenge against Mr. Wilson. It concludes, It is hard to conceive of what evidence there could be that would disprove the existence of White House efforts to 'punish Wilson.'


    With more filings expected from Mr. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor's work has the potential to keep the focus on Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney at a time when the president is struggling with his lowest approval ratings since he took office.


    Even on Monday, Mr. Bush found himself in an uncomfortable spot during an appearance at a Johns Hopkins University campus in Washington, when a student asked him to address Mr. Fitzgerald's assertion that the White House was seeking to retaliate against Mr. Wilson.


    Mr. Bush stumbled as he began his response before settling on an answer that sidestepped the question. He said he had ordered the formal declassification of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq in July 2003 because it was important for people to get a better sense for why I was saying what I was saying in my speeches about Iraq's efforts to reconstitute its weapons program.


    Mr. Bush said nothing about the earlier, informal authorization that Mr. Fitzgerald's court filing revealed. The prosecutor described testimony from Mr. Libby, who said Mr. Bush had told Mr. Cheney that it was permissible to reveal some information from the intelligence estimate, which described Mr. Hussein's efforts to acquire uranium.


    But on Monday, Mr. Bush was not talking about that. You're just going to have to let Mr. Fitzgerald complete his case, and I hope you understand that, Mr. Bush said. It's a serious legal matter that we've got to be careful in making public statements about it.


    Every prosecutor strives not just to prove a case, but also to tell a compelling story. It is now clear that Mr. Fitzgerald's account of what was happening in the White House in the summer of 2003 is very different from the Bush administration's narrative, which suggested that Mr. Wilson was seen as a minor figure whose criticisms could be answered by disclosing the underlying intelligence upon which Mr. Bush relied.


    It turned out that much of the information about Mr. Hussein's search for uranium was questionable at best, and that it became the subject of dispute almost as soon as it was included in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq.


    The answer to the question of whose recounting of events is correct — Mr. Bush's or Mr. Fitzgerald's — may not be known for months or years, if ever. But it seems there will be more clues, including some about the conversations between Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney.


    Mr. Fitzgerald said he was preparing to turn over to Mr. Libby 1,400 pages of handwritten notes — some presumably in Mr. Libby's own hand — that could shed light on two very different efforts at getting out the White House story.


    One effort — the July 18 declassification of the major conclusions of the intelligence estimate — was taking place in public, while another, Mr. Fitzgerald argues, was happening in secret, with only Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby involved.


    Last week's court filing has already led the White House to acknowledge, over the weekend, that Mr. Bush ordered the selective disclosure of parts of the intelligence estimate sometime in late June or early July. But administration officials insist that Mr. Bush played a somewhat passive role and did so without selecting Mr. Libby, or anyone else, to tell the story piecemeal to a small number of reporters.


    But in one of those odd twists in the unpredictable world of news leaks, neither of the reporters Mr. Libby met, Bob Woodward of The Washington Post or Judith Miller, then of The New York Times, reported a word of it under their own bylines. In fact, other reporters working on the story were talking to senior officials who were warning that the uranium information in the intelligence estimate was dubious at best.


    Mr. Fitzgerald did not identify who took part in the White House effort to argue otherwise, but the evidence he has cited so far shows that Mr. Cheney's office was the epicenter of concern about Mr. Wilson, the former ambassador sent to Niger by the C.I.A. to determine what deal, if any, Mr. Hussein had struck there.


    Throughout the spring and early summer of 2003, Mr. Fitzgerald concluded, the former ambassador had become an irritant to the administration, raising doubts about the truthfulness of assertions — made publicly by Mr. Bush in his State of the Union address in January of that year — that Iraq might have sought uranium in Africa to further its nuclear ambitions.


    Mr. Wilson's criticisms culminated in a July 6, 2003, Op-Ed article in The Times in which he voiced the same doubts for the first time on the record. He cited as his evidence his 2002 trip to Niger, instigated, he said, because of questions raised by Mr. Cheney's office.


    Mr. Wilson's article, Mr. Fitzgerald said in the filing, was viewed in the Office of the Vice President as a direct attack on the credibility of the vice president (and the president) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq.


    Mr. Fitzgerald suggested that the White House effort was a plan to undermine Mr. Wilson.


    Disclosing the belief that Mr. Wilson's wife sent him on the Niger trip was one way for defendant to contradict the assertion that the vice president had done so, while at the same time undercutting Mr. Wilson's credibility if Mr. Wilson were perceived to have received the assignment on account of nepotism, Mr. Fitzgerald's filing said.




    I think Lieberman puts Country first. -has guts.nm
    nm
    At least McCain's wife puts her money into

    I haven't seen anything on that. I see where she helps her own race. I haven't heard anything about her helping children with health problems like Mrs. McC.


    If anyone has any proof that Mrs. O does help others, I'd seriously like to know about it.


    Fox New Program on Obama - Sunday night 10/12
    HELLO EVERYONE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION!!
    >
    > SEAN HANNITY, OF HANNITY & COLMES ~ FOX NEWS, IS GOING TO AIR A VERY
    > IMPORTANT DOCUMENTARY ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, SUNDAY NIGHT AT 9:00 PM. HE
    > STATED ON THE AIR THIS EVENING THAT NO ONE IN THE NEWS MEDIA WAS WILLING
    > TO DO THIS. HANNITY IS GOING BACK TO OBAMA'S EARLIER DAYS, SHOWING
    EVEN
    > THEN HIS TIES TO RADICAL PROFESSORS, FRIENDS, SPIRITUAL ADVISERS,
    Etc.,
    > HE STATED THIS EVENING THAT HE WILL SHOW IN DETAIL HIS TIES TO REV.
    > WRIGHT FOR 20+ YRS (which we all
    > know) HOW HE WAS PARTICIPATING WITH THIS MAN, AND NOT FOR THE REASONS HE
    > STATES! HE HAS UNCOVERED MORE OF OBAMA'S RADICAL LEADERS AND WE WILL
    SEE
    > THINGS THAT NO ONE IN THE MEDIA IS WILLING TO PUT OUT THERE.&nb sp;
    THIS
    > WILL BE A NIGHT THAT YOU WILL KNOW MORE ABOUT OBAMA THAN EVER BEFORE.
    > HANNITY IS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS PROGRAM AND ASKED THAT EVERYONE
    > PLEASE, PLEASE WATCH~~ SUNDAY NIGHT, 9 PM.
    >
    > HANNITY IS DETERMINED THIS INFORMATION BE PUT OUT THERE BECAUSE AS
    > AMERICAN'S, WE STILL DO NOT KNOW ABOUT OBAMA!! WAKE UP AMERICA !! THIS
    > IS SERIOUS,EVERYONE. I KNOW MOST OF YOU WATCH FOX NEWS, AND YOU KNOW WHO
    > YOU ARE VOTING FOR, BUT IF YOU CAN, PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU
    > KNOW. THIS IS CRITICAL FOR OUR COUNTRY. MY PRAYER IS
    THAT WE, ALONG WITH
    > SEAN HANNITY, WILL REACH SOMEONE/ANYONE BEFORE NOV. 4th. WE MUST NOT
    > GIVE UP!!!

    the only thing I can find is a scholarship program
    for students with good grade, which I am in no way opposed to. This is different than guaranteeing a free ride to anyone.
    W puts money in blind trust It's been 8 yrs since
    but claims he lost money in the meltdown.  Guess economics was/is not his strong suit.  This makes me wonder if his economic advisors were ever able to dumb down their reports enough for W to be able to understand them.  Just 6 more days, praise the Lord. 
    Thanks for the article, puts O in a good light really.
    Told me how he is trying to rein in the lobbyists and get spending under better control and not things as usual in DC. I am Obama girl, thanks for posting!
    On 2/16 on history channel a program about Lincoln
    Think its called Stealing Lincolns body. Looks interesting.

    I'll be sure to watch this one tonight. I saw it advertised the other night when I was watching Sense and Sensibility.
    WC is not a government program - it is insurance that the company's pay
    nm
    US program unveils man behind Iraq weapons story sm


    Reuters
    U.S. program unveils man behind Iraq weapons story





    Thu Nov 1, 7:12 PM ET



    NEW YORK (Reuters) - An Iraqi defector made up his claim that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons, a threat cited by the Bush administration as a key reason for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.S. news program "60 Minutes" said on Thursday.


    Rafid Ahmed Alwan, codenamed "Curve Ball" in intelligence circles, claimed to be a chemical engineering expert but was instead an accused thief and a mediocre student, the program said. He arrived at a German refugee center in 1999.


    "To bolster his asylum case and increase his importance, he told officials he was a star chemical engineer who had been in charge of a facility at Djerf AL Nadaf that was making mobile biological weapons," "60 Minutes" said in a statement.


    President George W. Bush and senior U.S. officials argued that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction that threatened the security of the United States.


    But no such weapons have been found and what was supposed to have been a short U.S. engagement in Iraq is now in its fifth year, with more than 3,800 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands Iraqis killed.


    "60 Minutes" said it found an arrest warrant for Alwan in relation to a theft from the Babel television production company in Baghdad where he once worked. It said he studied chemical engineering at university but got low marks.


    The report, a culmination of a two-year investigation by journalist Bob Simon, is due to be broadcast on the CBS network on Sunday.


    "The (then) CIA director George Tenet gave Alwan's information to Secretary of State Colin Powell to use at the U.N. in his speech justifying military action against Iraq," "60 Minutes" said.


    That was, the program said, despite a letter from German intelligence officials saying that although Alwan appeared to be believable, there was not evidence to verify his story.


    "Through a spokesman, Tenet denies ever seeing the letter," "60 Minutes" said.


    "Alwan was caught when CIA interrogators were finally allowed to question him and confronted him with evidence that his story could not be as he described it," the program said.


    "Weapons inspectors had examined the plant at Djerf al Nadaf before the fall of Baghdad and found no evidence of biological agents."


    Glen Beck has a good program tonight.

    He's on again at 9 p.m. EST. I'm watching it now and it's very interesting. Watch if you can.


    I wasn't being nasty. The issue is why Iran has a nuclear program.

    They have stated repeatedly it is for energy. 


    I have a real difficult time knowing who to believe.  Bush has paid the media to present his point of view.  This tactic used to be called propaganda when it referred to Communists.  Communists were supposed to be the ones who wanted to take over the entire world and force their form of government on everyone.


    Today it's America doing the very same thing.


    It's not difficult to find an ever growing list of Bush lies.


    If you can provide me with a similar list of lies told by Ahmadinejad, I'd love to read it. 


    The issue here is credibility and who has the biggest history of lying.  Unfortunately, a pack of lies is what got us where we are in Iraq today.  To me, it looks like Bush is trying the very same tactics to get us into a war with Iran. 


    Although Ahmadinejad is a terrible, psychotic, murderous, dangerous individual, Bush is the person who has the five-year history of lying to the American people and to the world.


    Quite frankly, if I were the president of Iran and saw my neighbor, Iraq, invaded based on a pack of lies, I believe I'd want to flex my muscles and try to scare the USA into backing off and not attacking my citizens as they did in Iraq. 


    Israel has nuclear weapons (that I believe WE paid for).  The USA has nuclear weapons.  Why is that okay?


    The real threat is Korea, but Bush is too much of a coward and doesn't have the courage to address that threat.


    The propaganda machine of George W. Bush has cast Syria in a very negative light, yet Syria was responsible for saving American lives the other day by thwarting a terror attempt.


    That, in and of itself, in addition to Bush's refusal to get the Taliban that were in plain view the other day, has me questioning every single word that comes out of this lying president's mouth.


    Yes, I'll say it again.  He is a liar.  A LIAR!  Maybe in your neck of the woods, lying is an accepted form of communication.  Where I come from, it does nothing but destroy credibility and create distrust in the person who is doing the lying.  You can respond with all the snappy **you hate bush** and **you're on the side of the terrorists** comebacks you want (seems to be the usual conservative talking point response), but the bottom line is he is a chronic liar.  I don't hate Bush, but I sure as heck don't like (or trust) liars. 


    Nice post Katie. It's the electorial vote that puts
    the R or D candidate in the Big House, not "We The People" as stated in the Constitution.
    Regarding your comment on "armed guards," it got me thinking.....maybe the men and women in the US military should be the deciding or only voters. After all, it is they who protect and defend us from harms way. I have nothing but the highest admiration for them for risking their lives each and every day...and who for? US-the people. That's a he11 of alot more than Congress or the entire presidential staff do, IMO.
    Yes - there was a young surgeon featured on one local TV program about this mess. SM
    I didn't catch the first part of the segment, but he is having to think about joining the military medical corps because he had just opened his practice when the recession hit and can't pay his loans, and there aren't any openings in other practices around here now.
    Wow, newbie Jackie is with the PROGRAM!!! Alright! Already calling people liars. sm
    What a gooooooooood little liberal you are!  HIGH FIVE!
    Well...if it puts Obama in a good light, it is probably owned by George Soros. nm
    nm