Don't want to miss out on the latest buzz in politics? Start each day at wonk central: The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Washington Post White House reporter Peter Baker was online Wednesday, March 15, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

washingtonpost.com's Campaign 2006 interactive map.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Peter Baker: Good morning everyone. Another fun day in Washington politics and lots of interest already. We have 43 questions already posted before we begin, so let's get going.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: In the current news cycle the media has been trumpeting a so-called Republican revolt against the Bush administration's agenda but it seems to me that, excluding the collapse of the Dubai ports deal, Congressional Republicans have largely supported the President on his Supreme Court nominations, his subversion of FISA, his Iraq policy (such as it is), and his ambivalence about funding the Katrina reconstruction. Senator Specter is probably the best example of someone who claims the mantle of independent Republican while still carrying water for the administration on all the crucial issues. What are your thoughts?

Peter Baker: You make some good points. Republicans have supported much of President Bush's agenda despite their differences on key issues. But let's remember the context as well -- throughout the president's first term, Republicans virtually never stood apart from him at all. Now they have abandoned him on Social Security, abandoned him on Harriet Miers, abandoned him on the ports deal, abandoned him on his immigration guest worker program, forced torture legislation on him that he'd threatened to veto and expressed less than unquestioning support for the NSA surveillance and Patriot Act renewal. That doesn't mean Republicans don't still prefer George Bush in the White House to John Kerry but it does mean they're not marching quite in lockstep anymore.

_______________________

Des Moines, Iowa: Did you know there is a growing movement in Iowa to support Condi Rice for president? She got 30% of the preference in a poll in Iowa taken among Republicans, and a group for her has visited our state for political events. If more people from Iowa agree to get on the Condi train, what impact do you think it would have at the Ames Iowa straw poll? Could she gather all the people who supported Elizabeth Dole (who came in 3rd in 1999) or would Rice go even further in attracting the Bush supporters in our state and come out on top in the August straw poll? I live here and I don't know the answer. I just have hope

Peter Baker: The prospect of a Condi Rice candidacy has a lot of folks buzzing, no question. She would have a far different dynamic than Elizabeth Dole. For one thing, she is so close to President Bush that she would be seen as his candidate, even assuming he would stay officially neutral. That could be good or bad depending on whether his numbers keep cratering. But there's still serious doubt that she would run, at least for the top of the ticket. For one thing, she has said she's not running. For another, she has declared herself "mildly pro choice," a stance that wouldn't sit well with many if not most Republican primary voters.

_______________________

San Francisco, Calif.: Good Morning,

What am I missing about respect and admiration for Condi Rice?

The gossip that she might be a candidate for Pres in 2008 truly baffles me?

Personally I think she is out of the same Federal dog pound, protecting the same personal power, hungry lies, aggressions, and deceit?

Guess I haven't noticed her National and Internationl contributions for this Country.

What are they?

Peter Baker: Another view on Condi Rice.

_______________________

Laguna Beach, Calif.: How does McCain equate siding with Bush on foreign policy or on anything with winning the nomination for president? Does he think the poll numbers don't mean anything? Does he think we'll win the war in Iraq by then? Does he think Bush will suddenly get smart by 2007? Does he know something we don't?

Peter Baker: One thing he knows that we may not is that Republican primary voters will probably be much more loyal to President Bush than the broader public that responds to public opinion polls. His numbers have fallen even among Republicans, but he still has the support of more than 70 percent of his party. What's more, John McCain wants to build ties to the conservative wing of the party that historically has distrusted him and supported Bush.

_______________________

What did Condi Rice do?: Well, she went to India, and brought the President with her. 30 years from now that may be considered on the level of what Kissinger did in China.

Peter Baker: In the interest of furthering this discussion, another quarter heard from. More thoughts?

_______________________

Grinnell, Iowa: Peter,

Why when the president speaks does the media report the location of the speech rather than the audience. When one says he spoke "at George Washington University," the mental picture is of an auditorium full of students and professors. Who he actually spoke to was the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. That's an entirely diffent mental image, and it has nothing to do with George Washington University. Where a group rents a hall to host the President is irrelevant. The significant context of the speach is provided by the nature of the group the president is addressing.

Peter Baker: Thanks for the question. You make a good point. In our story on the president's speech on Monday, we said in the third paragraph, on the front page portion of the story, that he was speaking to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. We only noted that the physical location was George Washington University much deeper in the story, well after the jump.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Bush Sets Target for Transition In Iraq , ( Post, March 14, 2006 )

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I know there will be a dearth of questions on this today, but do you see Feingold's censure resolution gaining any traction? Based on the tenor of the story today I'd say the newsroom doesn't think so.

Secondly, do you see the any political backlash forthcoming for the hamhanded bumbling of the Moussaui case? Thanks.

Peter Baker: A lot of questions on censure today. Senator Russ Feingold's proposal to reprimand President Bush for authorizing the secret NSA surveillance has stirred a lot of passion both inside Washington and out. It seems clear that while it has traction among part of the Democratic Party base, it doesn't at the moment have much among the elected senators. There may be a certain lingering hangover from the Clinton impeachment episode, when no one came out looking all that good.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: A Senate Maverick Acts to Force an Issue , ( Post, March 15, 2006 )

_______________________

Pittsburgh, Pa.: Condi Rice says she "mildly pro choice"? Is that similar to being "kind of" pregnant? Interesting choice of phrase, don't you think?

Peter Baker: A question she'd be asked by both sides of the abortion debate if she were to run. I'm not sure what the answer is.

_______________________

Montreal, Canada: Peter,

Democrats are going to attack a Republican President and Republicans are going to defend him, that's their job. But how can someone stand up for, say, the legislative branch versus the executive without being painted as partisan (Dem) or disloyal (Rep) In fact criticism of something like warrantless surveillance could be both bipartisan and loyal or it could be empty politics. How do you tell? How do you present it to your readers?

Peter Baker: More good points. In fact, underlying a lot of the Republican concern over NSA in particular is the institutional prerogative of the legislative branch to write laws that are followed. Politics is there of course as is this structural struggle. We've tried to capture that in stories as well. My colleague Jim VandeHei and I wrote about Bush's campaign to reassert executive power and the congressional unease with that across party lines shortly after the NSA program was disclosed.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I read in the New York Times that The Post will have a buyout. If The Post had to cut one of the three reporters covering the White House, should it be Peter Baker, Jim VandeHei or Mike Fletcher? You will probably be modest and say yourself. What if the choice were between VandeHei and Fletcher?

Peter Baker: Sometimes during these chats I gather readers would dump all three of us. Let's not open that door!

_______________________

Ontario, Calif.: Peter,

With things going so badly for the Republicans these days on most fronts, I expect to see them start to emphasize the strong economy more pretty soon as the mid-terms loom. Are the Democrats ready to counter this strategy?

Thanks!

Peter Baker: The economy has been an interesting phenomenon politically. By many measures, the economy is doing pretty decently right now. But polls indicate significant economic anxiety among the public and disapproval of the president's handling of it. A Bush adviser said the other day that he attributes that to the broader public anxiety over Iraq, which has left people on edge generally.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I'm a lifelong Democrat and I support what Feingold is trying to do. All of his spineless colleagues in the Senate are showing us why no one takes them seriously at all. They don't stand for anything, and until they do the party will keep on getting what it deserves.

Peter Baker: A lot of comments like this today. I'll post a few for the sake of discussion. Anyone disagree?

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Why are no other Senators supporting Russ Feingold in his effort to censure the President? Certainly some other Democrats and even some Republicans believe that the administration is breaking the law with its domestic spying program. It seems to reflect a lack of political backbone and a lack of independence from the President.

Peter Baker: Here's another.

_______________________

New Madrid, Mo.: Peter, what do you think is the reason the dems wouldn't back Feingold? Did they think he was wrong to present the Res. or have they lost their backbone? Why are they scared of Republicans? I am a lifelong Dem and this bunch mystifies me. Thanks. P.S. When will Jim Vandehei answer questions. He is my man!!

Peter Baker: And still another. (Is that you, Mrs. VandeHei??)

_______________________

Charlottesville, Va.: Condi Rice in India equal to Nixon in China? Who is that person kidding? India has been an ally of the United States for a very long time, and a huge trade partner (not to mention the place where great masses of employees of U.S. companies reside). China was a cold war enemy of the United States when Nixon was there. The only thing Bush did was botch any hopes for nuclear nonproliferation. Why did you even take that ridiculous comment?

Peter Baker: I take lots of questions and comments from all sorts of points of view. These chats are better if we get a variety of thoughts, don't you think? And so here's another.

_______________________

Lewiston, N.Y.: "Well, she went to India, and brought the President with her. 30 years from now that may be considered on the level of what Kissinger did in China."

Huh? Have we been on the outs with India for 30 years? Have I missed something?

Peter Baker: And in the same vein.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Maureen Dowd wants Barack Obama to run for president. She's not the only one. Any chance at all that this might happen in 2008 (as opposed to 2012 or 2016, when we all know it will happen?

Peter Baker: It seems doubtful he'd run that early, though he might be seen by the eventual nominee as an attractive vice presidential running mate. Obama made a strong impression on a lot of Washington types at last weekend's Gridiron dinner when he delivered a very funny presentation that included a lot of self deprecation about the fact that he's gotten lots of hype without having actually done much legislatively yet.

_______________________

Irvington, N.Y.: Given the poor track record of Senators running for the Presidency over the past 40 years do you forsee the either McCain or Clinton getting the nomination? Which Governors should we be watching?

Peter Baker: If you had to bet at the moment, John McCain and Hillary Clinton are certainly in the strongest positions in their respective parties, with no one else really even close at the moment. Both have extraordinary name recognition, fundraising capacity, powerful bases of support and important experience in national campaigns. Having said that, rule nothing out. Either could stumble, someone else could make the case that the frontrunner isn't right for that party. The governors on the Democratic side to watch are Mark Warner (now a former), Iowa's Tom Vilsack and New Mexico's Bill Richardson. On the Republican side, there are Massachusetts's Mitt Romney, Arkansas's Mike Huckabee and New York's George Pataki. Haley Barbour of Mississippi recently took himself out.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: One note: Tom Harkin is supporting the censure resolution. "The president broke the law and he needs to be held accountable," Harkin said. "Talk about high crimes and misdemeanors!"

Peter Baker: Additional input on censure.

_______________________

Granger, Ind.: From what I have read, Condoleeza Rice was a mediocre National Security Advisor. She did little to stanch the infighting of Defense and State, and certainly did nothing to slow the momentum for the war.

Also, who can forget her infamous comments after 9/11, when she asked "who could have imagined" people flying planes into buildings --- even after she'd read briefings warning of that very thing.

Like others in the Bush administration, Rice has an aversion to the truth. Nothing in her record suggests she is qualified for political office, much less the presidency.

Peter Baker: More food for thought on Condi. Any supporters want to throw in their two cents?

_______________________

San Francisco, Calif.: Do you think that Jeb Bush is going to step into the Florida Senate race, replacing Katharine Harris? I really hope Harris stays in the race, since I think she's completely beatable, but it looks like this MZM campaign cash is sticking to her. Do you think Jeb Bush is interested in being a Senator, or does he need to start making money and thinking about running for President in 2008?

Peter Baker: Chris Cillizza, our whip-smart colleague from washingtonpost.com who follows these races closely, says we shouldn't assume Harris is dropping out. Check out his daily online column, The Fix, for the latest in politics here and around the country:

The Fix

_______________________

Re: Comments and questions: You said..

"I take lots of questions and comments from all sorts of points of view. These chats are better if we get a variety of thoughts, don't you think? And so here's another."

So I ask this, if you get all sorts of points of views, why is that all we see are the liberal/angry points of view. You have not portrayed one comment supporting the President. Please clarify. Thanks.

Peter Baker: Send me one supporting President Bush and I'll post it. I'm afraid I don't control who participates in the chats.

_______________________

Dryden, N.Y.: Although I no longer live there, as a native daughter I am extremely attached to the New Hampshire primary. Does the DNC realize the damage it is doing to the Democratic prospects in the only state to turn blue in 2004! Boo to the Inside-the-beltway bullies.

Peter Baker: An issue we haven't addressed today. It is an interesting sacred cow for the Democrats to take on. It's not clear to me, though, how it will ultimately change who they nominate or whether they will eventually win a general election.

_______________________

Re: Censorship/Impeachment: Mr. Baker,

In almost every reported story that actually addresses impeachment the remark is made that Democrats remember the backlash after the Clinton impeachment. What backlash was that? A Republican president and Congress? In what way was there a tangible backlash against congressional Republicans?

Peter Baker: I used the word "hangover," rather than backlash. A lot of folks in both parties in Congress truly disliked the whole process and don't want to go through it again. As for electoral consequences, you can debate it. In 1998, the Republicans lost five seats in the House even though Newt Gingrich had predicted impeachment would be a big winner with voters. And so a lot of people came away with the lesson that pushing impeachment is not necessarily good politics. On the other hand, Clinton still had high approval ratings at the time, while Bush currently does not, and the issues at stake now are different as well, so it's hard to make comparisons.

_______________________

Virginia Beach, Va.: I'm sure you don't get many comments supporting Pres. Bush, because the core that's left that supports him aren't the types who are interested in any other viewpoints but their own, so I suspect they don't participate in anything that would require them to think about anything that doesn't fit in their world view. Oops...run on sentence.

Peter Baker: Thanks for the thought. Any others?

_______________________

No, India has been on the outs with US!: Or haven't you paid attention to the outsourcing angst, the difficulties U.S. companies have in enforcing their contracts in India, the closed and subsidized markets, the nonaligned movement posturing, etc. Here is the natural counterweight to China, which ALREADY IS IN a cold war with the U.s., and we haven't done anything to court them.

Peter Baker: And continuing our debate over the subcontinent...

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: So six months after the resignation and subsequent arrest of White House procurement official David Safavian, perhaps one person in a hundred on the street could tell you who he is. Rest assured that had this occurred during the Clinton administration his would be a household name now. So - if you are even allowed to print this question - what is the latest on that story?

Peter Baker: Thanks for the cynicism. I'm allowed to post any question. David Safavian may not be a household name, but Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay are. There were lots of minor scandal figures in the Clinton era I bet not one person in a hundred could name either.

_______________________

In re: Codi Rice: All this coming down on Condi Rice? Help me out Peter, I'm try to understand - especially after having experienced such a non-existent Sec of State as Ms. Albright. Talk about a Miss "what have you done lately". Come on people, relax the anger pill a bit.

Peter Baker: She certainly has generated more interest than anyone else we've discussed today, hasn't she?

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: What are the early reviews of Paul Hackett's appearance last night on The Daily Show?

Peter Baker: Afraid I didn't see it (young baby). What did you think?

_______________________

Irvine, Calif.: Peter,

when do you think the Democrats will come out with their version of the Contract with America. Also do you think the Democrats will gain control of the House or Senate

Peter Baker: They've been promising one for a while now, but they keep putting it off and putting it off. The conditions for the Democrats taking over one house or the other are certainly better than they've been in the dozen years since Republicans took over. But at the same time, polls show that many voters don't think much more of congressional Democrats than they do of President Bush. In our latest poll, 65 percent said Bush has no clear plan for Iraq, but 70 percent said the same of Democrats in Congress.

Poll

_______________________

RE: Clinton Impeachment: You said no one came out looking good. Actually, I believe Hillary Clinton came out looking good, with sympathy from a lot of people and that this is what helped her get elected to the Senate in NY.

Peter Baker: Maybe so. Fair point. But at a heck of a price, don't you think? Would any of us really want our marriages dissected in public in such a way?

_______________________

Dallas, Tex.: Has Sen. Feingold offered anything to suggest that he's more interested in protecting this country from terrorists than in bringing down the President? I haven't. What would he do? If he wants to be President, shouldn't we expect him and the Democrats to articulate what and how they would do this? The whole censure thing is a grandstanding move by Feingold.

Peter Baker: A lot of his Democratic colleagues in the Senate think the same thing, notwithstanding the passionate feelings of many rank and file Democrats.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: No need to post, but THANK YOU for writing

"On the other hand, Clinton still had high approval ratings at the time, while Bush currently does not, and the issues at stake now are different as well, so it's hard to make comparisons."

Cogent and succinct.

Peter Baker: Someone offers a "thank you" and you think I won't post it? No chance!

Let's go ahead and close on that note. Thanks for all the great questions, provocative comments and smart insights, as always. These are terrific conversations, mainly because you guys are so engaged. Invite your friends to join as well, even some who don't agree with you.

Have a great day.

Best,

Peter

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.