CALIFORNIA YANKEE

New Poll Is Good News For President Bush

The latest New York Times/CBS News poll provides better news for President Bush.

According to the New York Times article about the poll:

Already, most voters think Mr. Kerry is a politician who says what people want to hear, the poll found, rather than what he believes — the line of attack Mr. Bush has used against him in speeches.

At the same time, there is sweeping concern among Americans about the president's economic policies, including his ability to create jobs and the effectiveness of his tax cuts, according to the poll.

[. . .]

Perhaps most significant for Mr. Bush, the number of Americans who think that the nation is heading in the wrong direction is now 54 percent, as high as it has been in his presidency.

[. . .]

The Times/CBS News poll offered the latest evidence that the race for president was as tight as has long been predicted. Even after two weeks in which Mr. Bush has run televised advertisements promoting himself and attacking Mr. Kerry, and in which Mr. Kerry has enjoyed the glow of favorable coverage that greeted his near-sweep of Democratic primaries, the two men are effectively tied, with 46 percent of voters saying they supported Mr. Bush and 43 percent backing Mr. Kerry.

The candidacy of Ralph Nader looms as a potentially lethal threat to Democratic hopes of regaining the White House: With Mr. Nader in the race, Mr. Bush leads Mr. Kerry by 46 percent to 38 percent, with Mr. Nader drawing 7 percent of the votes. In a sign of the polarized electorate Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry are facing, three-quarters of supporters of each candidate asserted they would not change their mind before the election.

The nationwide telephone poll of 1,206 adults, including 984 registered voters, was taken from last Wednesday through Sunday. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

The Times' article correctly states that the 46% Bush 43% Kerry spread is within the poll's margin of error. However the Times doesn't point out that this is a reversal of the polls February results which found Kerry ahead 47% - 46%.

The poll can be accessed by following this link and in the Campaign 2004 box click on the "Interactive Feature: Complete Results: New York Times/CBS Poll" link.

Sharpton Endorses Kerry

The Associated Press reports that Sharpton endorsed Kerry, but promised to continue his own "urban agenda campaign:"

The mixed message — endorsing a former rival but not exiting the stage — came after a face-to-face meeting with Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

"It would be misleading and futile to campaign for the nomination, but it continues for the platform and direction of the party," Sharpton told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. "My campaign continues now to pick up delegates so that we can go to the convention to coalesce with other delegates."

[. . .]

In welcoming the endorsement, Kerry praised Sharpton's "ability to cut through the double-talk we see coming from this administration," and pledged to work for Sharpton's oft-stated goal of a new "urban agenda."

Sharpton's campaign has been plagued by accounting problems which are being investigated by the Federal Election Commission.

A sharpton endorsement is perfect for the slanderous name calling campaign being run by Kerry. Sharpton still refuses to apologize for inciting racial hatred in the Tawana Brawley matter. Brawley's unproven allegations that she, a black teen, was raped by white police officers resulted in a civil slander judgment against Sharpton.

What an endorsement!

Hillary Clinton Endorses Kerry's Slander Of Republicans

The Boston Herald reports that Hillary Clinton endorsed Kerry's slandering Republicans as crooked liars:

Clinton, in a speech and question-and-answer session for National Public Radio, backed Kerry's unguarded comments - made near a microphone at a Chicago rally - about "crooked'' GOP attackers.

"It's quite descriptive of reality," Clinton said to applause from the largely partisan audience at the John F. Kennedy Library, where she received the museum's Distinguished American Award.

Kerry's slanderous remarks and Hillary's endorsement of Kerry's slander degrades the tone of our national debate. It is unfortunate that Kerry and the Democrats have chosen to engage in a campaign of name calling instead of ideas. As I posted previously, Kerry, and now Hillary, owes America an apology.

Israel Retaliates For Ashdod Terror Bombings

Reuters reports that Israeli attack helicopters fired at least five s into Gaza City early on Monday. The air strike came hours after two Gaza terrorists killed 10 people at Israel's port of Ashdod.

Secretary Powell Tells Kerry To Put Up Or Shut Up

On Fox News Sunday Chris Wallace asked Secretary of State Powell about Kerry's assertion that foreign leaders want Kerry to defeat Bush:

WALLACE: All right. I'm not sure you can answer this one, but I would like to get your comment on it, if I could.

Senator Kerry says that foreign leaders — you look like you know this — want him to beat the president. And here's what he's had to say: "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy, they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy."'

POWELL: I can't even talk to that, Chris. I don't know what foreign leaders Senator Kerry is talking about. It's an easy charge, an easy assertion to make. But if he feels it is that important an assertion to make, he ought to list some names. If he can't list names, then perhaps he should find something else to talk about.

Kerry refused to reveal which foreign leaders are rooting for him when questioned about the issue during a town meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Secretary Powell is right. Kerry should not have said that he met foreign leaders that want him to win if he is unwilling to name those leaders. It's too easy to make such assertions when you are not required to offer any evidence to support them.

When could Kerry have met with leaders that told him they prefer Kerry to President Bush? The Washington Times reports that Kerry has made no official foreign trips since the start of last year, and a review of Kerry's domestic travel schedule revealed only one opportunity for him to meet with foreign leaders here:

According to travel records kept by the Secretary of the Senate, Mr. Kerry's last official trip abroad was in early 2002 when he visited the United Kingdom, Jordan, Egypt and Israel. The only other trip noted in Senate records since that time is an October 2002 domestic trip to Charleston, S.C., to appear on MSNBC's Hardball program.

The Washington Times also scoured White House, State Department and other public records for all official trips made to the United States by foreign leaders since the start of last year. During more than 30 such trips, Mr. Kerry was out of town campaigning, at home or in the hospital for a prostate-cancer operation, according to his travel schedules from this year and last.

The only instance found when Mr. Kerry was in the same town as a foreign leader was Sept. 24, when New Zealand Foreign Minister Philip Goff was in Washington meeting with State Department officials. On that day, according to his schedule, Mr. Kerry received the endorsement of the International Association of Fire Fighters in Washington.

I'm sure there are world leaders would prefer Kerry to President Bush such as North Korea's Kim Jong-il and 's mullahs.

Spain Gives The Evil Doers A Victory

MSNBC reports that voters have swept Spain's ruling party from party:

The Socialist Party declared victory with 79 percent of the votes counted, as results showed it winning 164 seats in the 350-member parliament and the ruling Popular Party taking 147. The latter had 183 seats in the outgoing legislature.

[. . .]

Critics have said Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar invited the attention of Osama bin Laden’s terror group by allying Spain with Washington in the invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein.

Fueling anger were suspicions that the government withheld information in the investigation to avoid political fallout from the Thursday bombings, which killed 200 people and injured 1,500. The government had initially blamed the Basque separatist group ETA.

Before the attacks, polls gave ruling the Popular Party and its candidate, Mariano Rajoy, a 3-5 percentage point lead over the Socialists and their leader Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero in the race for the 350-seat Congress of Deputies.

Analysts had warned that Spain's ruling party would suffer if voters believed a purported al-Qaeda video's claims that the group had mounted its first attack in Europe and in reprisal for Spain's support for the U.S.-led war in Iraq that most Spaniards opposed.

The Socialists have pledged to withdraw Spain's 1,300 troops from Iraq if the U.N. does not take control by June 30 when Washington plans to hand power back to Iraqis.

It is extremely troubling that by conducting a horrific terrorist attack on Spanish civilians the evil doers can change the outcome of an election. In allowing the evil doers this victory the Spanish electorate has ensured that we will see more terrorists attacks attempting to impact election results.

This Week's Toast Is Up

Steven Taylor, at PoliBlog, has posted this week's Toast-O-Meter.

Rowland Impeachment Inquiry Gets Messy

Motions to quash subpoenas, witnesses utilizing the Fifth Amendment protections against self incrimination, a lack of standards for impeachment, and accusations that the committee's lawyer cannot practice law in the state are starting to make the inquiry look like a partisan witch hunt.

In addition, attorneys complain that the impeachment inquiry will hinder their clients' rights in a federal corruption probe, which is impacting many of the same issues and many of the same people.

Governor Rowland is under scrutiny for accepting gifts for his Litchfield cottage from friends, politically appointed employees and a state contractor and later lying about it. Rowland is also subject of a federal investigation.

According to the Associated Press, Hugh Keefe, a defense lawyer who represents Rowland's former co-chief of staff asserts that the "legislative inquiry was premature and ill-advised" because the U.S. attorney's office is conducting an exhaustive and thorough investigation.

State Representative Michael Lawlor, a Democrat, said "people must realize that the impeachment process is political, not legal:"

"This is not jury duty. This is not a trial," said Lawlor, who has been challenged by Rowland's lawyers for being outspoken about the process and his opinions. "We're a team of prosecutors deciding whether to bring a case to the grand jury, and that would be the House."

The fact that this is a political process is made clear by the fight over what standard should be used for impeachment. Unlike the U.S. Constitution, there is no standard for impeachment in the Connecticut Constitution.

According to the Stamford Advocate, the lawyer for the committee investigating Rowland said that dishonesty and ethical misconduct can form the basis for impeachment. Rowland's lawyer argued that impeachment should be reserved for the most serious offenses.

The Committee's lawyer disagrees that the standard should be serious criminal misconduct or "similarly grave wrongdoing:"

"Impeachment focuses not on the nature of the wrongful act itself, but on the effects that the wrongful act has on the public office or on the public trust," Reich said. "If the act is serious enough to be abusive of a public office, or to violate the public trust, it is impeachable."

Rowland's lawyer stressed that every impeachment of a governor in the United States during the 20th century was preceded by a criminal indictment. Not one, he said, was impeached solely on charges of dishonesty or ethical lapses.

Despite the legal arguments Representative John Wayne Fox, a Democrat and a co-chairman of the committee, suggested that a standard need not be spelled out:

"The standard of impeachment is whether or not the majority of these 10 people come to a conclusion that a recommendation ought to be made to the Senate that certain articles of impeachment ought to be adopted and that the Senate ought to decide whether the governor ought to be removed," Fox said.

Rowland now attacks the lack of defined standards, inquiry's broad focus and its projected $1 million cost:

"You can't just do an investigation and then sometime later figure out what the standards are," Rowland said. "It's never worked that way in most other cases. It's like driving down the highway and telling you to drive to Danbury and when you get there we'll tell you what the speed limit was."

Like most Connecticut residents I wish that Rowland would resign and save us the trouble of this impeachment inquiry. I have posted previously that Rowland wont quit.

Nevertheless, Rowland does have a point. It is unfair to conduct an investigation, subpoena thousand of documents, determine what you can prove and then decide what the standard will be. For anyone to defend themselves the standard must be known in advance. The Committee's failure to adopt a standard creates the impression it is on a witch hunt.

In addition, it appears that at least one member of the committee investigating Rowland has prejudged the matter. Representative Lawlor publicly criticized Rowland associates who asserted their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to subpoenas from the impeachment panel:

"Lawlor should hang his head in shame," said Hugh Keefe, the prominent New Haven lawyer who represents Peter Ellef, Rowland's former co-chief of staff and central figure in both a federal criminal investigation and the Rowland impeachment inquiry. "He was a practicing lawyer. He should know better than to say that assertion of one's Constitutional rights constitutes `stonewalling.'"

[. . .]

Lawlor was quoted by The Associated Press this week as saying that the impeachment committee "could make a decision based on what is already in the public record, but it would be better to have more."

Lawlor also was quoted as saying that the decision this week by Rowland's ex-driver and former State Homeland Security Director Vincent DeRosa to plead the Fifth Amendment was a bad reflection on Rowland. Lawlor responded to Thursday's criticism by repeating the same quotes.

"In my mind, it does" reflect badly on Rowland, Lawlor said. "Of course, it does."

Unfortunately, Representative Lawlor's behavior reflects badly on the Committee.

Kerry Started It

CNN's The Morning Grind concludes that Kerry started the negative ads with one aired on September 3, 2003.

That ad called Bush's jobs record an "astonishing failure." Kerry promised in that ad to roll back Bush's tax cuts and to be a president, presumably unlike Bush, who's "on the side of America's middle class."

On October 31, Kerry aired an ad in Iowa saying the Bush's administration "works for those at the top, not you," and has passed "the biggest tax cuts in history to the wealthy:"

"George Bush and Dick Cheney let polluters and oil companies rewrite our environmental laws. They defend the loopholes that let corporations avoid taxes by moving jobs overseas," an announcer says in that Kerry spot, titled "Courage."

Kerry's campaign seems to think those ads don't count. CNN isn't convinced:

Please. No clocks, no ball games. Kerry ran the first negative ads of the '04 presidential campaign. Period.

Madrid Massacre

The Associated Press reports that explosions rocked three Madrid train stations today, killing at least 62 rush-hour commuters and wounding hundreds more. Officials called the explosions the deadliest attack ever by the Basque separatist group ETA:

"This is a massacre," government spokesman Eduardo Zaplana said.

At least two bombs exploded around 7:30 a.m. local time in a commuter train arriving at Atocha station, a bustling hub for subway, commuter and long-distance trains in Spain's capital. Blasts rocked two other stops on a commuter line leading to Atocha.

[. . .]

There was no claim of responsibility, but officials blamed ETA.

[. . .]

On Feb. 29, police intercepted a Madrid-bound van packed with more than 1,100 pounds of explosives, and blamed ETA. On Christmas eve, police thwarted an attempted bombing at Chamartin, another Madrid rail station, and arrested two suspected ETA members.

UPDATE: Reuters reports that the explosions killed 131 people and injured more than 400.

UPDATE II: I won't be able to post any more about these bombings until this evening. In the meantime you can stay on top of developments at The Command Post's - Global Recon page. The Command Post Team is doing a great job of covering this developing story.