A Defining Moment for Congress

A nanosecond, for the record, is one billionth of a second.

Cal Thomas is much more chipper in his syndicated column.

Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard has a take on the Tuesday session that speaks for itself: "We now know why the Bush administration hasn't made the capture of Osama bin Laden a paramount goal of the war on terror. Emphasis on bin Laden doesn't fit with the administration's strategy for combating terrorism. Here's how President Bush explained this Tuesday: 'This thing about . . . let's put 100,000 of our special forces stomping through Pakistan in order to find bin Laden is just simply not the strategy that will work.'

"Rather, Bush says there's a better way to stay on offense against terrorists. 'The way you win the war on terror,' Bush said, 'is to find people [who are terrorists] and get them to give you information about what their buddies are fixing to do.' . . .

"'It's really important at this stage . . . to be thinking about how to institutionalize courses of action that will enable future presidents to gain the information necessary to prevent attack,' he said."

Mind you, getting bin Laden out of the picture -- and, yes, questioning him -- seems like a good step to me.

Barnes also took a swat at the National Review for allegedly breaking the ground rules of the meeting. "An unusual aspect of the session was the president's request for some of his remarks to be considered off the record. Nevertheless, several of these comments were reported anyway, including his observation that he senses a new spiritual awakening in the country."

For Bush, Sacrifice = Taxes

More from Barnes: "Bush dismissed as cynical the charge that he hasn't asked the American people to accept sacrifices as American soldiers fight against terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere. 'You know what the definition of sacrifice is for a lot of people' who question him about the lack of sacrifice? 'How come you didn't raise taxes? That's what that means as far as I'm concerned . . . If we had raised taxes to create a sense of sacrifice, it would have caused even greater sacrifice because I believe raising taxes in a recession would cause the economy to get even worse.'"

But it was Bush himself who, unprompted, made the surprising association between sacrifice and taxes just last month in an interview with NBC's Brian Williams .

"WILLIAMS: The folks who say you should have asked for some sort of sacrifice from all of us after 9/11, do they have a case looking back on it?

"BUSH: Americans are sacrificing. I mean, we are. You know, we pay a lot of taxes. America sacrificed when they, you know, when the economy went into the tank. Americans sacrificed when, you know, air travel was disrupted. American taxpayers have paid a lot to help this nation recover. I think Americans have sacrificed."

And then there's the fact that by failing to raise taxes, he has just shifted the "sacrifice" of paying for the war to the next generation.

Denying the Bubble

Barnes also writes: "The president said he is not isolated in the White House. 'I know exactly what's in the news,' he said. 'I listen to a lot of people. I've got smart people around me. And they can march right in here -- this Oval Office can be slightly intimidating, but I've got people here who can fight through the aura and say, "I think you're wrong. I think you're right."'"

Novak v Armitage

R. Jeffrey Smith writes in The Washington Post: "Columnist Robert D. Novak, who first revealed Valerie Plame's employment by the CIA and touched off a lengthy federal leak investigation, is accusing his primary source of misrepresenting their conversation to make the source's role in the disclosure seem more casual than it was."

Novak writes in his syndicated column: "First, [former deputy secretary of state Richard L.] Armitage did not, as he now indicates, merely pass on something he had heard and that he 'thought' might be so. Rather, he identified to me the CIA division where Mrs. Wilson worked and said flatly that she recommended the mission to Niger by her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson. Second, Armitage did not slip me this information as idle chitchat, as he now suggests. He made clear that he considered it especially suited for my column."

But in his October 1, 2003, column , in which he first discussed how he learned of Plame's identity, he wrote: "It was an offhand revelation from this official, who is no partisan gunslinger."

So which is it?

Novak also describes an unusual MO for a journalist. He took no notes and adhered to "tacit rather than explicit ground rules: deep background with nothing said attributed to Armitage or even to an anonymous State Department official."

Really Sorry

Remember how Washington Post columnist David S. Broder recently called on reporters who he said had falsely maligned Karl Rove to apologize?

Eric Mink writes in his column for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "Since the revelation about Armitage, I've done a lot of soul searching. I went back to the voluminous official legal filings of the prosecution and defense in the Libby case. . . .

"I looked again at press coverage of the story stretching back nearly three years. . . .

"After reviewing all this material, I feel obliged to say: I'm sorry Karl Rove . . . still has a job."

The Unfounded Anecdote

Mark Hosenball writes for Newsweek: "The claim that terrorist leader Mohamed Atta met in Prague with an Iraqi spy a few months before 9/11 was never substantiated, but that didn't stop the White House from trying to insert the allegation in presidential speeches, according to classified documents. . . .

"Although Bush never mentioned the Atta anecdote, Cheney referred to it on several occasions -- most recently in a TV appearance last weekend on NBC's 'Meet the Press' during which he conceded that the claim that Atta had a pre-Sept. 11 meeting with an Iraqi spook had never been confirmed."

Poll Watch

John Harwood writes in the Wall Street Journal: "President Bush's efforts to explain and win support for his policies on Iraq and terrorism appear to be paying some initial dividends as midterm congressional campaigns heat up.

"A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows that Mr. Bush's overall approval rating, as well as his marks on handling Iraq, rose modestly after a series of speeches imploring Americans to remain patient despite repeated setbacks in Iraq. Voters also expressed slightly increased willingness to maintain U.S. troop strength there as commanders struggle to tamp down a continued insurgency and sectarian violence. . . .

"The president's approval rating remains weak at 42%, though it is improved from 38% in June."

Bolton Watch

Peter Baker and Dafna Linzer write in The Washington Post: "President Bush's nomination of John R. Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations appears increasingly endangered in the Senate, prompting the administration to explore other ways to keep him in the job after his temporary appointment expires in January, officials said yesterday."

Gas Watch

Does Bush have some insider information about gas prices, which appear to be conveniently dropping just in time for the mid-term election?

Barnes writes in the Weekly Standard: "Bush said the price of gasoline, which has been falling rapidly, is one of the 'interesting indicators' that the press should watch carefully. 'Just giving you a heads up,' he added."

Bush and Borat

The Washington Times reports: "President Bush will host the president of Kazakhstan at the end of this month for talks that will cover, in the words of a White House spokesman, 'a range of issues including democracy promotion, the war on terror, energy diversification, expanding prosperity and our common commitment to working together to advance freedom and security' -- not British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen and his controversial new film 'Borat,' as some media reports have suggested."

Believe It or Not

Evan Thomas of Newsweek actually believes that Bush has read more than 60 books in the last year -- then marvels at how little he knows about history.