Post Politics Hour

washingtonpost.com's Daily Politics Discussion

Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with 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.

Congressional Reporter Jonathan Weisman was online Friday, Sept. 15, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.

Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

The transcript follows.

_______________________

Jonathan Weisman: Oy, it's already turning into quite a day, Bob Ney cops a plea, President Bush takes to the bully pulpit and GOP leaders stand by their man. I sure hope the questions are substantive, but if you're thinking about Tom Cruise at FedEx Field, I invite you to get it off your chest. So here we go.

____________________

Tom Davis (VA-11) votes to weaken earmark disclosure: Just as he did with lobbying reform. His district voted for Kaine by 13 points in the last election and he has an aggressive challenger in Andy Hurst. Is it his $3 million war chest of PAC money that makes him seem indestructible?

Jonathan Weisman: Nothing is indestructible, but Mr. Davis is on noone's vulnerable list. Do you know something I don't?

_______________________

Philadelphia, Pa.: Do you think Powell is trying to redeem himself by finally speaking up about the change of the Geneva Conventions? I say redeem because it was his false testimony to the U.N. in Feb '03 that got a lot of Americans to back the Iraq War.

Jonathan Weisman: I think his UN testimony still haunts him. It sure haunts his former chief of staff, who has been outspoken about what he feels was a deception. I don't think that is what is motivating Mr. Powell. Sen. McCain and Powell have been long-time allies and friends, and Powell is reflecting a growing consensus in the retired military community, not the retired Bush administration.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Okay - two weeks of senior administration folks using bin Laden and Lenin and Hitler all in the same sentence and then the President tells Fred Barnes that catching bin Laden is "not a big deal." Help me, my head is spinning! Didn't Nancy Pelosi get accused of being a traitor for saying something far more innocuous about a week ago?

Jonathan Weisman: I have to say this whole Bin Laden thing is getting ridiculous. Bush says Bin Laden doesn't matter and the DNC goes hog wild. Pelosi says Bin Laden doesn't matter and the Republicans in the House go hog wild. I think what saner heads can all agree on is this: Capturing bin Laden probably wouldn't matter a whole lot to international terrorism, as Pelosi and Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld have said. Saying that truth matters a whole lot in the political atmosphere of 2006. Now that's consensus!

_______________________

Detroit, Mich.: The President's recent interview with Matt Lauer was painful to watch, especially when he pressed Lauer to understand that people "want to kill your family." Is this really appropriate for the POTUS? Does the GOP really believe such language will work to their advantage?

Jonathan Weisman: They certainly must. It's saturating the airwaves, from the White House to your local House race.

_______________________

Rochester, Minn.: Please clear up a concern for me. With Colin Powell and John McCain dragging down Bush's ability to get Congress to pass a revised plan for detainee's to stand trial, are they trying to settle old scores in the Republican party or are they running for president?

Jonathan Weisman: I think McCain's position hurts his bid for the presidency. He has spent the last year trying to get back into the good graces of Republican primary voters, who have always been suspicious of his views and loyalties. He must know that this showdown jeopardized all those gains. McCain remains extremely popular with independents, many Democrats and some Republicans. But to get the GOP nomination, he must either hope he can win over the party stalwarts or hope they are desperate enough about their chances that they throw out their misgivings and vote for him anyway.

_______________________

Detroit, Mich.: Regarding Powell...I have heard rumors of him contemplating a possible run for Republican primary. Other suggest he is absolutely finished with politics. Have you heard anything?

Jonathan Weisman: He has said -- and I believe -- he will never run for elective office.

_______________________

Tired of all the political ads: Thanks for the great article this morning on Congressman Ney.

Somewhat related--maybe if State Sen. Joy Padgett wins in OH-18 (officially becoming the nominee yesterday) it will prove to everyone that you don't need to spend two years campaigning....I know, wishful thinking....

Jonathan Weisman: Ney's district does lean Republican. If Padgett's opponent, Zack Space, had been running an effective campaign and raising a whole lot of money, I think your point would be trenchant. But Padgett is blessed. She's coming in without much money against a Democrat without much money. And Washington Republicans are ready to shower her with cash. Others have done the campaign grunt work for her.

_______________________

Paris, France: Concerning Allen-Webb, am I the only one who thinks this latest controversy over Webb's letter opposing women in combat in 1979 helps him rather than hurts him? It reminds everyone again of Webb's military background which is the one issue that plays well in Northern Virginia and the rest of the state, and frankly I think many voters are uncomfortable with the idea of women in combat to begin with, or shared the same view 25 years ago when this letter was written. If this is the best Allen's got, he's in more trouble than I thought.

Jonathan Weisman: I was kinda thinking the same thing. Until now, Republicans have been trying to tar Webb as a liberal by association, pointing out the liberal bloggers and Washington Dems working on his behalf. Suddenly, they're painting him as a military Neanderthal. If women this year are more likely to vote Democratic as a protest against the president, than the current controversy may not lose them but may help him with white men, the GOP mainstay.

_______________________

Glen Ellyn, Ill.: If McCain's position on torture hurts his chances (which I disagree with you on), then whose chances does it help?

Jonathan Weisman: I don't think it helps anyone -- not House Republicans, who wanted to be fighting Democrats, not McCain, and not the president, who has put way too much personal capital into this fight. This could turn disastrous for the Republican Party.

_______________________

Durham, N.C.: As someone said "all politics is local". Do you think the Republican strategy of "nationalizing" a mid term congressional election would be the equivalent of shooting itself in the foot? I know this strategy worked in 2002 congressional election but that was more because of 9/11 than anything and 2004 was a presidential election year and people voted to re-elect the President and keep the policy of his going by keeping the Republican majority.

Jonathan Weisman: They are "nationalizing" it around national security, but localizing it on the airwaves with personal attacks on local issues against Democratic candidates. As the race draws nearer, I expect the latter tactic will come to the fore.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: With state and local efforts doing so well on pushing minimum wage in state houses and onto ballots, what's the GOP retort? Especially now that wage decline is understood as a fact and Congress was negligent in putting together a wage bill? Thanks.

Jonathan Weisman: Democrats are hoping minimum wage referenda will be to 2006 what gay marriage initiatives were to 2004 -- a way to rally the Democratic base. We'll see if it works.

_______________________

Gulf Shores, Ala.: Kinky Friedman, who is running for Governor of Texas, wisely stated, "I don't mind being called a flip-flopper" I think we could use a flip-flopper as governor because a flip-flopper is a human being open to change, and God knows change is what we need now." This man can do what Democrats running for National office can't seem to do...come up with an answer to Republican slogans!

Jonathan Weisman: He is a wise man. He also said we should legalize marijuana in non-violent apprehensions. I don't know if that will hunt in Texas.

_______________________

Madison, Wis.: Jonathan, I just want to thank you for your article on the released report by the Senate Select Committee that ran 9/9/2006. It should have been the lead story of every media outlet that day.

Jonathan Weisman: Thank you. I recommend a follow-up by Walter Pincus in today's Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/14/AR2006091401545.html

_______________________

Bob Ney's plea: Is he going to name any new names?

Jonathan Weisman: Dunno. He was close to many folks, but the next big target, Tom DeLay, may have wriggled off the hook by making himself a small target -- a retired congressman.

_______________________

London, U.K.: On the front of the FT today there was a pic of John McCain and him admitting that he knew this could hurt his presidential chances but he is pushing for this trail reform regardless. Could this be spun back to strengthen his bid by showing in some regards, that he is committed first and foremost to convictions and not pandering to other politicos?

Jonathan Weisman: See above. McCain's problem is not with voters who love mavericks. It is with Republican primary voters who resent disloyalty, especially against a president that still love.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Here it is in clickable form... CIA Learned in '02 That Bin Laden Had No Iraq Ties, Report Says , ( Post, Sept. 15, 2006 )

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Apparently, George Allen's new ad about Jim Webb shorts Webb's Reagan Administration service by a little over three years. If Democrats had run an ad with a similar mistake, NRSC lawyers would be threatening TV stations with legal action unless they stopped running the ad. Are Democrats pursuing a similar strategy with respect to the Allen ad? I've heard nothing.

Jonathan Weisman: Democrats are loving the controversy over the Reagan ad and loving the fact that Webb shows no inclination to pull it. I doubt they feel the need to intervene.

_______________________

Los Angeles, Calif.: WHY ISN'T THE POST REPORTING ON RIDICULOUS BILLS ABOUT TO PASS IN THE SENATE, LIKE THIS ONE:

NSA Bill Performs a Patriot Act

Jonathan Weisman: My friend, we have written buckets of stories on the NSA bill. The effort is mired in intra-party warfare in the House Judiciary Committee and is in trouble in the Senate. It and the tribunals bill will be the focus of our coverage for the next two weeks, rest assured.

_______________________

Las Cruces, N.M.: I read that the Specter bill on wiretapping is, according to Harry Reid, dead in the water. Does that mean the Dems plan to filibuster or does that indicate something else entirely, such as disagreement all around in both parties?

Jonathan Weisman: They probably do not need to. I can count six Senate Republicans who have serious qualms with it, including the three that held up the PATRIOT Act renewal for months. Their contention: The Senate needs more time to study the issue. When the Senate needs more time, it tends to take it.

_______________________

New Hampshire: Hi Jonathan and thanks so much for doing these chats.

I wonder if you managed to catch Bob Novak on CSPAN this morning. Now that Richard Armitage has come forward as a leaker, I would have expected some element of relief on Mr. Novak's part. Instead this morning, he was abrupt and rude to anyone at all who questioned him. He actually called David Corn a "nasty piece of work" and had nothing nice to say about The Washington Post either. Sour grapes is one thing, but his ranting and railing this morning was most unbecoming. Does this kind of partisanship in a journalist serve the profession in any way?

Jonathan Weisman: I did not catch it, but remember, Mr. Novak gave himself the moniker "Prince of Darkness." Whether its shtick or personality, I don't know, but I think those mannerisms are nothing new.

_______________________

London, U.K.: P.S. just wanted to say I appreciate how quickly you take and answer questions. Your chats are always a great way to end a Friday.

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks. I do wonders with the four fingers I can type with.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: On Bob Ney -- it may or may not be true that the Republican corruption issue helps Democrats at the national level, but it seems that in the state of Ohio, the issue has great resonance. Witness DeWine's and Blackwell's weak showings for example. My question is this: how much fuel does the Ney guilty plea add to that particular fire? Is it likely to make things tougher for DeWine and for Ohio GOP Congressmen? Bonus points if you can answer without saying "Democrats took money from Abramoff too."

Jonathan Weisman: Excellent question. Ohio is a cauldron of discontent with the Republican Party, after CoinGate, the governor's fiasco, etc. DeWine is in real trouble because he has to run statewide. If Ney was running again, of course, he'd be dead. But as we saw in the race to succeed convicted felon Randy Cunningham in California, the sins of the predecessor do not necessarily tar the successor, even if he or she is from the same party.

_______________________

Chicago, Ill.: Thanks for taking my comment.

As a follow up to the Fix's comments about an Obama run for Pres. in 2008, yesterday, Illinois Comptroller, Dan Hynes, who lost to Obama in the Dem. primary for senator (one of Obama's lucky breaks in 2004) just came out and urged Obama to run for Pres. in 2008. Dick Durbin, Ill. other senator, has been urging Obama to keep his options open but as far as I know, Hynes is the first state office holder to come out for an Obama run in '08.

Jonathan Weisman: Did not know that. Thanks for the information.

_______________________

Chicago, Ill.: I guess this speculation about Obama leads to a question, at what point does he have to commit to a 2008 run? I assume we will be seeing several candidates throwing their hats in the ring shortly after Nov. or in early 2007. How long can Obama wait if he is really serious about giving it a go?

Jonathan Weisman: I think Obama can raise money for fast. He is rapidly becoming a beloved figure in the Democratic Party. And speculation on Hillary aside, I do not think there is an anointed candidate. He has some time.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Regarding Glen Ellyn, Ill's question about who is helped by McCain's stand against torture. I know this is a political discussion but we can just stand back a second and acknowledge that American troops will be hugely benefited by McCain's stand. At the end of the day, his Presidential ambitions have to be balanced about his memories of torture in Vietnam.

Jonathan Weisman: He could not have said it better.

_______________________

Greenville, S.C.: Jonathan - What happened to Richard Boucher, the press spokesman at the State Department?

Jonathan Weisman: He's now the asst secretary of state for South Asia -- that courtesy of my colleague, Mike Abramowitz.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Maybe not your bailiwick, but I noticed today on The Post web page yet another story about child abuse by a Catholic priest. This is, of course, intolerable, but there was a story appearing last week on one of the back pages of the Metro section about a local rabbi who was caught in an Internet child molestation sting. Why the big difference in coverage between two equally awful stories?

Jonathan Weisman: You're tight. That is not my bailiwick.

_______________________

Yorktown Heights, N.Y.: Hi Jonathan,

I saw Bill Frist on PBS last night say that the Democrats, in wanting to roll back the Bush tax cuts, are promoting the equivalent of a 60%+ (forgot the number he used, but it was high) tax increase for the middle class.

I know this isn't true and I know that Kerry and other Democrats have often talked of rolling back the tax break for the top 1% of earners. What are the real numbers? What are the Democrats really proposing and is it not the case that the Bush tax cuts heavily favor the extremely wealthy?

Jonathan Weisman: If Democrats are serious about rolling back tax cuts in the service of the mounting federal debt, they would have to do more than raise the highest tax brackets back up and undo the estate tax cuts. The serious money is in the middle class cuts, bracket reductions, the new 10 percent bracket, the doubling of the child credit and the reduction of the marriage penalty. So far, I have not heard any Democrats say they want to undo those cut. I don't have the specific numbers, but I sincerely doubt just raising the highest two brackets and undoing estate tax cuts and capital gains and dividend cuts would have much impact on the middle class. But then again, it depends what you call middle class. The median income in this country is somewhere around $44,000 per household. But in many parts of the east and west coast, I'd imagine folks pulling in $250,000 a year would call themselves middle class.

_______________________

Oxford, Miss.: Thanks for taking my comment!

That's all.

Jonathan Weisman: Taken

_______________________

Ellicott City, Md.: With the digital ballots, I found that if you didn't know who the candidates were for the local elections that alphabetical was often the way that I felt like going, therefore in the Edwards/Wynn race I could see a lot of votes for Edwards just being her last name came up first. This is especially true for the ones like school board where you vote for a lot on a huge list. Since digital voting they can randomize the order pretty easily, why don't they do that and make it more fair. I would love to see statistics on the smaller races and how often those that come earlier in the alphabet won.

Jonathan Weisman: Why is that digital? On DC's old paper ballots, the same issue would apply.

_______________________

New Hampshire: Hi Jonathan and thanks for taking my question.

The Senate Judiciary Committee just approved a bill that would give the President permission to continue the illegal NSA wiretapping program.

As Mr. Leahy, vice chair of the Judiciary Committee wrote:

"Unfortunately, in a lock-step Republican vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would grant President Bush permission to continue his warrantless domestic wiretap program, and in addition, immunize officials who have violated federal law by authorizing such illegal activities."

Do you think that the legislation will be passed or will the Congress opt out of this until after the November elections?

Jonathan Weisman: See above. I think the NSA bill has the votes in the House, but as of now, House leaders would have to strip it away from the Judiciary Committee and bring it directly to the floor. In the Senate, I do not think the votes are there at this point -- and time's awaistin'

_______________________

New York: I tend to agree with Washington's analysis of McCain's pushback on the torture bill--that he knows torture firsthand and understands the benefits of upholding the Geneva Convention. Which raises a question: Might his current stand be (arguably equally moral) payback of sorts to a White House that signed his torture bill last year only reluctantly, and even then added a signing statement that rendered it more or less moot?

Jonathan Weisman: I'm not sure I follow you. The signing of the detainee language last year surely emboldened McCain this go-round. I doubt the signing statement is having much effect.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: So Bob Ney pleads guilty to both conspiring with Abramoff, Volz, and Scanlon to defraud the public AND to accepting bribes from a foreign businessman! I didn't see that second one coming. Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney going out with guilty pleas -- Tom Delay also out -- is there a session of Congress that matches the high level of felony of this one?

Jonathan Weisman: Abscam, Boston. But hey, more may be coming.

_______________________

North Bethesda, Md.: "This is, of course, intolerable, but there was a story appearing last week on one of the back pages of the Metro section about a local rabbi who was caught in an Internet child molestation sting. Why the big difference in coverage between two equally awful stories?"

This story was front-page news, on TV, on Dateline, etc. when he was arrested. This was just the follow-up that he was convicted.

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks for the help.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Watching the President's press conference, he seems very angry: yelling, pounding his fist, pointing his finger, etc. Has the President blown a gasket?

Jonathan Weisman: He has been increasingly emphatic at these things. Maybe by 2008 we'll be able to see the steam.

_______________________

Helena, Mont.: I keep waiting for the Abramoff shoe to drop on one of my senators, Conrad Burns, and turn the election into a Tester landslide. What's the latest Abramoff/Burns rumor that you've been hearing?

Jonathan Weisman: We're not hearing much. Burns is definitely of interest to the Feds, more so than anyone else in the Senate. But I wouldn't be holding my breath for a break in the case before Nov. 7. To get Ney, they got guilty pleas from three House aides close to him, including his former chief of staff. Nothing like that has happened on the Burns front.

_______________________

Columbus, Ohio: Now that Ohio state senator Joy Padgett is the winner of the Republican primary, will she be allowed to define herself on the issues or will the Democrats be so desperate they will try to throw each and every problem from Gov. Taft to Bob Ney at her to bring her down in defeat for House seat?

Jonathan Weisman: The Democrats will try the latter. It will be up to the voters to decide whether it works.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Good morning. Could you explain this Geneva Conventions turmoil between Colin Powell and Condi Rice? Don't we need the clarity and definitions as Secretary Rice is suggesting?

Jonathan Weisman: This is a dispute over principle. Yes, many say we need more clarity, including McCain and Powell. But they say we cannot have so much clarity that we are, in effect, reinterpreting the Geneva Convention. If we do that, they say, every country will feel free to follow suit. Secretary Rice does not believe the administration is going that far. McCain and Powell think they have gone way too far. We report. You decide.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: You're a four-fingered typist? Terrific! I am as well, and usually feel lonely.

Jonathan Weisman: When I'm feeling really giddy, some time I find myself using my stray right ring finger. But not today.

_______________________

Des Moines, Iowa: Dear Sir:

Would I be correct in thinking former Secretary of State Colin Powell might be seen as trying to sabotage the President on the issue of defining the creation of the military tribunals? Or is this just payback for whatever happened in the war between the State Department and the Defense Department back in early 2003?

Jonathan Weisman: The effect could be seen as sabotage. Depends whether you want to see Mr. Powell as a man of principle or a man of vindictiveness.

_______________________

Anonymous: The Reliable Source column today by Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts about the four year celebration of the "Chris Matthews Show" sounded like fun. May I ask about the straw poll which gave high marks to McCain and Hillary? Did the list of Republicans include Sam Brownback, Chuck Hagel, Gov. Huckabee, Condi Rice, and Bill Frist?

Some think it is too early to discuss 2008, but I am interested in the names Mr. Matthews and his group see as "viable". Any chance of asking Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts to share the list of names on the Matthews ballot?

Jonathan Weisman: I'm sorry, anonymous. I just don't know.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: Good Morning. Maybe off topic but Senator Mary Landrieu sent a verbal shot over the Republican bow that I think the Democratic Party should take up. I remember Landrieu's last Senate campaign where she seem to have "gotten it" by keeping it local. Is Landrieu a really smart politician or does she have an outstanding staff?

Jonathan Weisman: I read that shot, and many of us thought she had hit the theme Democrats would be wise to pick up. During the president's first term, she was seen as a some-time ally, but after he went after her like gangbusters in her re-election bid, she turned understandably bitter. She seems to be sharpening her rhetoric.

_______________________

Prescott, Ariz.: I've heard that the Geneva Conventions were originally left intentionally vague so as to stop nations from making lists that abut right up against the rules. Do you know anything about this?

Jonathan Weisman: I don't, but if you read the regulations, that makes sense. They are remarkably broad.

_______________________

Ashland, Mo.: The Post and other media labeled the Senate Armed Services Republicans as "defying" the President. Why aren't they just disagreeing or differing? I thought Senators had the right to their own opinions and to enact them. Isn't this overheated rhetoric by the media one of the reasons people are losing interest in politics?

Jonathan Weisman: I don't think it was overheated at all. The vice president personally lobbied on the issue. The administration told McCain and Graham they wanted cordial negotiations, then sent the director of central intelligence to a closed door meeting to tell Republicans the McCain-Graham-Warner bill would shut down their terrorism program. Then Bush came to Capitol Hill himself. After all that, the committee simply went ahead with its plans. It was defiance in tone and content.

_______________________

Atlanta, Ga.: Glen Ellyn, Ill.: If McCain's position on torture hurts his chances (which I disagree with you on), then whose chances does it help?

It helps the country!

Jonathan Weisman: We were talking politics. That is a different matter.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: No question -- just a comment.

Arlington, Va. asks whether the Geneva Convention has suffered from a lack of clarity over the last half-century.

In a recent Post article, a former JAG chief (Army Lt. Col. Geoffrey S. Corn) was quoted saying "that Common Article 3 was, according to its written history, 'left deliberately vague because efforts to define it would invariably lead to wrongdoers identifying 'exceptions,' and because the meaning was plain -- treat people like humans and not animals or objects.'"

Jonathan Weisman: I'll publish as is. Thanks.

_______________________

Jonathan Weisman: I'm sad to say I have actually exhausted my questions. So signing off for today. Thanks.

_______________________

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.