Bush Deplores American Timidity

"The Nobel Peace Prize he won on Friday was a blow to U.S. President George W. Bush and his widely criticized environmental policy and will long be savoured by the man who lost the bitter 2000 presidential election by a whisker.

"The honour was bestowed jointly on the former vice president and the U.N. climate panel for campaigning against the threat of global warming, in a not-so-subtle swipe at Bush, a latecomer to the battle against climate change.

"It may also be interpreted as a part of an international backlash not only against seven years of what many see as environmental backsliding under Bush but also against his Iraq war policy and perceived arrogance in world affairs."

From today's gaggle with White House spokesman Tony Fratto:

"Q Tony, does the President have any reaction to Al Gore's winning the Nobel Prize?

"MR. FRATTO: Yes, the President learned about it this morning. Of course, he's happy for Vice President Gore, happy for the International Panel on Climate Change scientists, who also shared the Peace Prize. Obviously it's an important recognition and we're sure the Vice President is thrilled.

"Q Is he going to call him?

"MR. FRATTO: I don't know of any plans to make calls to any of the winners at this point. . . .

"Q Given that his approach on climate is so different from Al Gore's, does he feel that this award is in any way sending a message about his own policies?

"MR. FRATTO: I'm not sure what -- no, I don't see it that way at all. No."

Curbing the Watchdog?

Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane write in the New York Times: "The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, has ordered an unusual internal inquiry into the work of the agency's inspector general, whose aggressive investigations of the C.I.A.'s detention and interrogation programs and other matters have created resentment among agency operatives.

"A small team working for General Hayden is looking into the conduct of the agency's watchdog office, which is led by Inspector General John L. Helgerson. Current and former government officials said the review had caused anxiety and anger in Mr. Helgerson's office and aroused concern on Capitol Hill that it posed a conflict of interest. . . .

"A report by Mr. Helgerson's office completed in the spring of 2004 warned that some C.I.A.-approved interrogation procedures appeared to constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, as defined by the international Convention Against Torture. . . .

"The inspector general's office also rankled agency officials when it completed a withering report about the C.I.A's missteps before the Sept. 11 attack -- a report that recommended 'accountability boards' to consider disciplinary action against a handful of senior officials."

Greg Miller writes in the Los Angeles Times: "The move has prompted concerns that Hayden is seeking to rein in" Helgerson.

Torture Watch

Francis X. Stone writes in a letter to the editor of the Boston Globe: "All of the approaches to interrogation supported by President Bush as 'nontorture' (head slapping, freezing temperatures, water boarding) qualify as torture under international law.

"During my last year in Vietnam, 1968 to '69, I was in charge of US Air Force interrogation of Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army prisoners. None of what Bush labels as legal was legal under the Geneva Conventions, to which the United States is still a signatory.

"US Army, Marine, and Army of Republic of Vietnam personnel were constantly amazed at the interrogation results produced by the Air Force, and we were never allowed to touch prisoners, let alone head-slap them. Every human being has needs, and we learned those needs and exploited them. Neither Bush's bullying approach in the Mideast nor his unlawful interrogation program has worked. Sophisticated psychological methods are not being used by the Bush people, so the alleged 'nontorture' bullying will continue."

White House E-Mail Watch

Pete Yost writes for the Associated Press: "An ethics advocacy group asked a federal judge Thursday to order the White House to preserve tapes used to back up its e-mail system.

"Asserting that the White House may not have kept copies of e-mails that are at the heart of a dispute over the Bush administration's record-keeping, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a motion asking for a court order to preserve computer backup tapes.

"'The White House is refusing to confirm that they have maintained e-mail going back to the beginning of the administration as they are required by law to do,' said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics."

About Those Softballs

Jacques Steinberg writes in the New York Times: "A profile of Lynne Cheney, the vice president's wife, that appeared on the CBS News program 'Sunday Morning' last weekend included a statement of disclosure. The correspondent, Rita Braver, told viewers that her husband, the Washington lawyer Robert B. Barnett, had represented Ms. Cheney in the publishing deal for her new memoir, 'Blue Skies, No Fences,' which served as the main peg for the story.

"Yesterday, after questions about the propriety of Ms. Braver's assignment were raised on several media Web sites, including that of CBS News, the division's senior vice president for standards, Linda Mason, defended it. . . .

"But some journalists have suggested CBS News would have been better served by assigning someone whose spouse had no financial ties to Ms. Cheney to do the profile, which included an extended tour of the vice president's home. ('We were the first television crew ever invited into their personal living quarters,' Ms. Braver told viewers.) . . .

"Several blog postings characterized Ms. Braver's profile of Ms. Cheney as soft. Ms. Braver said that, over all, the piece was in keeping with the 'tone' of 'Sunday Morning.' 'We tend not to be confrontational,' she said."

White House Web Site Watch

The White House Web site just can't keep up with all those departures.

Al Kamen writes in The Washington Post: "The odyssey started Oct. 2, when Timothy Noah of Slate (which is owned by The Washington Post) wrote about the 'seat-warmers' occupying the lower-tier Bush Cabinet jobs -- that is, the positions excluding State, Defense, Treasury and Justice.

"He challenged readers on Oct. 2 to match the names and faces he listed with their Cabinet jobs. And he provided the answers so they could check themselves.

"Problem was, a red-faced Noah found out, he got a couple wrong himself. He identified the agriculture secretary as Mike Johanns, but Johanns left on Sept. 20. And Jim Nicholson had left the job of veterans affairs secretary on Oct. 1.

"How could Noah have made this error? Well, he relied on the White House Web site. What was he thinking?

"Noah duly corrected his list. A few days later, the White House corrected the site, with pictures of Chuck Conner as acting secretary of agriculture and acting secretary Gordon H. Mansfield running VA. Peter Keisler was listed as acting attorney general.

"But Wednesday, the White House, in a Sen. Larry Craig-like move, un-resigned Gonzales, re-listing him as attorney general and vaporizing Keisler."

Kamen gets results: Sometime Thursday morning, Keisler reappeared.

Wrong Again

From the " Presidential Message" on the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr sent out by the White House yesterday afternoon: "Our Nation is proud to be a land of many beliefs, and our society is enriched by our Muslim citizens. On the first day of Shawwal, the first month of the Islamic calendar, may people of all faiths reflect on the values we hold in common, including love of family, the importance of community, and gratitude to God."

Oops. Two hours later an updated version went out. Shawwal is the tenth month of the Islamic calendar -- not the first.

Carter Redux

Ken Herman blogs for the Cox News Service: "White House reaction to former President Carter's harsh assessment of Vice President Cheney? Not much, other than a demotion.

"This [Thursday] from Press Secretary Dana Perino:

"'I haven't talked to the president about the recent comments by Vice President Carter. Obviously, he's an American citizen and free to express his views. Personal attacks on the vice president are just something that we're not going to comment on. And if the former president chooses to engage in that, we'll let him do that on his own.'"

Hello Dalai Lama

Reuters reports: "U.S. President George W. Bush, risking Chinese anger, will host exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama at the White House next week.

"Bush will welcome the Dalai Lama on Tuesday, a day before he accepts the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor Congress can bestow. . . .

"The award ceremony will be the first time Bush will have appeared in public with the Dalai Lama, who has visited the White House before but always for private meetings."

Bush has hosted the Dalai Lama in the White House private residence three times before, in 2001, 2003 and 2005.

Cheney v. Matthews

Jeff Dufour and Patrick Gavin wrote last week in the Washington Examiner: "Chris Matthews had barely finished praising his colleagues at the 10th anniversary party for his 'Hardball' show Thursday night in Washington, D.C. when his remarks turned political and pointed. . . .

"Bush White House officials -- especially those from Vice President Cheney's office -- called MSNBC brass to complain about the content of his show and attempted to influence its editorial content. 'They will not silence me!' Matthews declared.

"'They've finally been caught in their criminality,' Matthews continued, although he did not specify the exact criminal behavior to which he referred. He then drew an obvious Bush-Nixon parallel by saying, 'Spiro Agnew was not an American hero.'"

Matthews now explains a bit more in an interview with Stephen Battaglio of TVGuide.com:

"Matthews: I thought on the 10th anniversary it would be good to celebrate the First Amendment, which gives us all our living. We reviewed in brief the remarkable experience of covering the Clinton [scandal] and the defense of the war with Iraq. And the difference in these two cases was that although I was extremely tough on Clinton, there was never any attempt to silence me -- whereas there was a concerted effort by [Vice President Cheney's office] to silence me. It came in the form of three different people calling trying to quiet me. . . .

"[T]here was a concerted effort to stop me from reporting on what the vice president's office was doing in terms of making the case that there was a nuclear threat from Iraq."

Cartoon Watch

Steve Sack on Bush's Democratic helpers; Mike Luckovich on Bush's sinking ship.