Washington Post Congressional Reporter Jonathan Weisman (Julia Ewan -- The Washington Post)

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.

Washington Post congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman was online Friday, Sept. 21 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

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

A transcript follows.

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.

____________________

Jonathan Weisman: I'm late, I'm late, I'm very very late. But I'm up in the United States Senate, where the wheels are spinning and nothing is happening. So we might as well chat away. That's all their doing.

_______________________

Chicago: Thanks for taking questions. What do you see at the event(s) that could really shake up either of the presidential primary races between now and January? I'm not talking about Osama blowing up the Sears Tower or 1,000 GIs being killed in Iraq next month but regularly scheduled events or debates, or the beginning of the millions in TV ads, things within the campaigns' control.

Jonathan Weisman: How about Obama blowing up the Sears Tower! I never liked that building anyway. (Just kidding, folks.) I really don't see what is going to shake up up the Democratic primary. It seems like Hillary Clinton has a very distinct group of followers, especially working class, middle-class women, and Obama continues to run well with the elite. But there just aren't enough elite out there. Of course, if Obama can pull off a win in the Iowa caucuses, all bets are off.

The Republican field is much more up for grabs. I think Iraq will play big on McCain's fate and we're still waiting to see if Fred Thompson can make good on all that hope that was placed in him.

_______________________

Rolla, Mo.:"Democrats Fail to Pass Anti-War Legislation." When will the media report as the lede "Republicans block Anti-War Legislation?" The former feeds the public anger at Democrats for failing to end the War, but the one thing the Dems can do without Republican help, cut off funding, is not supported by the American public. Is it fair to always cite this as a Democratic failure vs. Republican obstructionism?

Jonathan Weisman: The Democrats control Congress. They will always get a lot of the blame when nothing happens. All of our stories have said Republicans are blocking these votes, but the Democratic leadership promised that this round of Iraq debates would be different, that they would take a less confrontational tack and really reach out to Republicans to find a bipartisan consensus that might anger their anti-war base but could actually bring about incremental change. They have so far failed miserably to make good on those promises, and they should be held to account. We're waiting for the Sister Soulja moment.

_______________________

Gettysburg, Pa.: Thanks for taking my question. Looking at the Fix's senate line, things look really grim for the GOP. If all ten of the listed seats would switch hands the Dems would gain 8. Presumably there are some others further down the list (TX, KY, TN, ID(?)) where the Dems at least have a shot too. What's your assessment of how the senate races in 2008 are shaping up? Do the Dems also gain House seats and, if so, how many?

Jonathan Weisman: With all due respect to my colleague, Chris Cillizza, who really knows politics better than I do, I think 60 is an overreach. Despite all of Stevens' legal problems, Alaska is a Republican state. Ditto Nebraska, especially with former Gov. Mike Johanns in the race. My bet is that Bob Kerrey doesn't run against the guy, and even if he did, I'd think Johanns would win. Susan Collins may face a difficult race in Maine, but her opponent, Tom Andrews, is a pretty low-key guy, not a barn-burner, and it's tough to knock off moderates. Gordon Smith is a bonified war opponent now, and Oregon Democrats don't have a really strong candidate yet. And don't forget, Mary Landrieu will be running for re-election in a Louisiana that has turned much more Republican, in part because of the post-Katrina exodus.

Don't get your hopes up.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: So glad you're doing the chat today! You're the best.

Why are The Post and other papers ignoring the latest developments in the Ted Stevens bribery probe? It was on page A10 today that the FBI has been taping his phone conversations. Isn't that front-page stuff?

Sheesh, what's a corrupt senator got to do to get on the front page these days? Take a bribe in an airport men's room? Get tased while taking bribe? Take a bribe from O.J.?

Jonathan Weisman: I'm going to be really honest with you. We don't, and we can't, have someone in Alaska, and because of the time differences, these stories are breaking really, really late. My colleague, Paul Kane, has been trying to keep up, but it's been very difficult.

I agree, these are very important stories.

_______________________

Reston, Va.: Hi Jonathan, what are the repercussions for the Democrats who voted for that thing about moveon.org? How about the Republicans who voted against it? Guess most everyone will forget about it by the time the next election will show up anyway.

Hope your daughter's health is doing good.

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks for your concern about Alissa. She's doing alright, but that's too long a story to tell here.

As for repercussions, how long can indigestion from eating red herring really last. This issue ticks me off, to be honest. The Senate is in the middle of a debate about the course of the war and we are talking about a yellowing ad in a newspaper (our rival to boot). The Democrats are pushing their own red herring, a slip of the tongue by House Minority Leader John Boehner.

I hope all of this is quickly forgotten.

_______________________

NE Senate: Mike Johanns vs. Bob Kerrey--who wins?

Jonathan Weisman: My guess, with Johanns in the race, Kerrey doesn't run. But if he did, Republicans will paint him as a New York liberal who long ago abandoned Nebraska to run a leftwing university in Manhattan -- and not Manhattan, Kansas.

So, under those circumstances, who do you think would win?

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: The Dems have compromised way beyond the immediate withdrawal their base wants. Tell me what the Repubs in the Senate have offered? It takes two to tango.

Jonathan Weisman: The Republican moderates have been as feckless and indecisive as the Democrats, don't get me wrong. But let's look at the proposal by Susan Collins and Ben Nelson. They would mandate an immediate mission change, from combat to counterterrorism, border security and the training of Iraqi security forces. The amendment wouldn't mandate troop withdrawals, but by Collins' estimate, about 50,000 troops would be needed to do the remaining missions. With nothing to do, more than 100,000 could come home.

And it's binding. Isn't that something?

_______________________

Disillusio, ND: By far the best thing I have seen come out of the Washington Post recently is this Truth Squad fact checker. It is simple, straightforward, unbiased, and I love it. I hate hate the rhetoric of politics, all of these empty words and positioning that mean nothing. And it is so rewarding to see people and the untruths they speak revealed (and that goes for MoveOn.org AND Romney, and any other person regardless of association or creed). Kudos and thank you!

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks. I really like it too. Good to have Michael Dobbs back.

_______________________

Anonymous:"They have so far failed miserably to make good on those promises, and they should be held to account. We're waiting for the Sister Soulja moment"

You are not entitled to factor this judgment into your reporting. It is unprofessional and unethical.

Jonathan Weisman: Touche.

_______________________

Hillary, Darth Vader, and Cheney: Not that I disagree with Hillary Clinton's Darth Vader reference, but I DO think it's a little irresponsible, if not a downright dumb thing to say. Will Republicans latch onto this a la the infamous macaca statement?

Jonathan Weisman: They haven't yet. They're still preoccupied by a nespaper ad that ran a few weeks ago in Brand X.

_______________________

Restroom: Does Sen. Craig get plenty of space in the Senate restroom these days? Awkwaaard...

Jonathan Weisman: Well Restroom, he does look a little lonely in the hallways. I can't say I know what's happening in the stalls.

_______________________

Cortez, Colo.: Something I don't understand is that if only 50 to 60 percent of us vote and 30 to 36 percent of those people highly approve of this administration, why are we surprised that the Democrats can't change the course our country is on?

It seems to me the responsibility for the state of the country rests on the shoulders of we, the people.

Jonathan Weisman: I'm glad to see that personal responsibility still resonates in Colorado. I must add, however, that efforts to figure out what those non-voters think have repeatedly shown they pretty much think the way the voters do. That is, don't expect that 100% voting in this country would change a whole lot. (I'd venture to say there are pockets where that is not true, especially African-American counties in the south where voting rates are truly abysmal.)

_______________________

Mary Bono - Connie Mack engagement: So, does Mary move to Florida, or Connie to California? I seem to recall a Congresswoman from Kansas decades ago who married a House colleague from Indiana but tried to keep her House seat, but lost for reelection on the slogan, "Martha doesn't shop here any more." Or do you think times have changed re commuter marriages?

Jonathan Weisman: I think they will have no choice but to have a commuter marriage, but with Mary Bono's "home" in SoCal, she's probably spending a lot of time in DC anyway. They can't tell their constituents, but I'd imagine they'll find the time to be together in the warm confines of our nation's capital, if not Our Nation's Capitol.

_______________________

Detroit: Jonathan, a personal question: I know you and your colleagues are required to be "objective" in your reportage, but you are all also human beings as well, which leads me to ask, do you think this administration has tested the line between personal feelings about politics and journalistic ethics? To put it more simply, would you say that most of your colleagues no longer regard Bush as a credible source of information? Listening to recent comments by Chris Matthews, Howard Fineman, Richard Wolfe, and the Posts' Dana Milbank, one really senses this is the case.

Jonathan Weisman: Detroit, that is an impossible question to answer in a public forum. We still believe that what the president says is news. And as we have seen this week in the Senate, he still holds the whip hand, at least on Iraq. He has a veto pen that he's suddenly itching to use. We will continue to cover him relentlessly.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: That was a pretty spooky way Bush answered the question posed to him about the Israeli bombing in Syria. What's up with that ?

Jonathan Weisman: Didn't see it. What did he say?

_______________________

Abingdon, Md.: Well, since you're in the Senate, this is an appropriate question (maybe you can yell it out to them)...it seems the Republicans were all hell-bent on this "nuclear option" on eliminating the 60 vote rule when it came to judicial appointees -- which ended up forming some sort of compromise to get through, why have we not heard any talk of the Dems playing the same game, but applying the rule to topics related to the war?

Jonathan Weisman: I have heard a bit of talk on that, but remember, Harry Reid and the Democrats were threatening to blow up the Senate if Bill Frist shattered the filibuster option. They'd look like rank hypocrits if they did it now.

_______________________

Naperville, Ill.: Everything I have read indicates that Fred Thompson's campaign is getting off to a really rocky start. Any idea when the poll numbers are going to start reflecting this? Who benefits the most if the Thompson balloon goes bust?

Jonathan Weisman: It has indeed been rocky. Anytime you make more news with campaign shakeups and desultory crowds, you're not gaining momentum. If he goes bust, I think Romney is the big winner. Already, he has made real inroads among conservatives who are leary of Giuliani and can't forgive McCain for his immigration stand. Many of those conservatives have held out for Thompson. If they are disappointed, it seems like Romney will be their home.

_______________________

Plano, Tex.: Jonathan, thanks for your participation in these chats. The prodigious volume of your questions asked are a wonder to us all.

Since President Bush is so "disgusted" with MoveOn's Petraeus ad and feels as though Hill Democrats owe it to the country to "denounce" the ad (even though, headline aside, it's pretty much true), when can we expect him to "denounce" blatantly false ads that his campaign and/or political advisers (read: Rove) are responsible for, such as John McCain's "illegitimate black baby," Max Cleland being in cahoots with Saddam and Osama, and John Kerry being "swifted" while Bush hid behind "Memogate"? Should I be holding my breath?

Jonathan Weisman: You'll be very blue in the face. The Republican attacks on the MoveOn ad have been a marvel of successful PR. It's given them something to talk about other than the war, and it even has you off message. I repeat, I think it's a flagrant red herring, but I have to marvel at the GOP success with this one.

_______________________

Richmond, Va.: Re: "And it is so rewarding to see people and the untruths they speak revealed (and that goes for MoveOn.org AND Romney, and any other person regardless of association or creed)." Wishful thinking. Facts have never gotten in the way of politics.

Jonathan Weisman: Amen, brother -- or sister.

_______________________

Midwest: Just read Kristin Gore's new book, "Sammy's House." The heroine is the health policy adviser to the vice president. Her significant other is a somewhat dweebish, but quite charming Washington Post political reporter. Any idea who on the staff might have inspired Ms. Gore's portrayal?

Jonathan Weisman: Well, I am dweebish, but Peter Baker is far more charming.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Thanks for your answer to Rolla. You have come as close as any of your colleagues to expressing The Post's anti-liberal, anti-anti-war bias. In other words when you say the "Democrats" should be held accountable you mean the anti-war activists are to blame for no agreement and no legislation; not, heaven forbid, the Republicans who have and still vote as a solid block for the war despite the polls and the electorate's November mandate. Your reference to a Sista Soulja moment,by which you mean the conservative Democrats should cut off their fellow liberal Democrats at the knees, highlights your bias because you never would imagine that the Republicans who keep thwarting the public's will need to change. You don't consider even exploring that possibility or even raising it as an option because The Post wants the war to go on and on.

Jonathan Weisman: I knew this was coming. The Democratic leadership has tried, repeatedly, to pressure Republicans to embrace a hard and fast deadline to bring the troops home. They have now publicly acknowledged that it won't work and have said they need to moderate that position to win enough Republicans over to get something to the president's desk. Those are facts.

But they can't do it unless they are willing to take on the elements in the party who oppose compromise. If the Democratic Leadership wants to stick by its guns and continue to push for a mandatory end to the war, they can go for it. But they said they would try another tack. And we're waiting to see if it happens.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.

_______________________

Arlington, Va: On the Israeli-Syria issue, it wasn't what he said but how. His demeanor changed, was obviously uncomfortable, and his accent disappeared and he said three times at least (to followups from D. Gregory) - "I'm not going to comment on the matter".

Jonathan Weisman: Ah, well, we led the paper this morning with the issue. Very interesting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/20/AR2007092002701.html?hpid=topnews

_______________________

McLean: How depressed are House Republicans right now? Unlike their Senate colleagues, they have no meaningful role in legislation. But like their Senate colleagues, their chances of winning back control in 2008 look pretty slim. Do you expect more retirments?

Jonathan Weisman: Pretty darned depressed. I wrote about this a few days ago. The Republican Conference met on Tuesday morning, and all the talk was of retirements, the fundraising malaise and dark warnings that they would lose more ground unless they could get out there and bring in more money. As Rep. Jeff Flake said, it would have been depressing if the subject had not been so commonplace. Now it's just boring.

And yes, I do expect more retirements. Many of these retirements, like Hastert's, LaHood's and Weller's today, are in pretty Republican districts, though not scarlet red. The problem is money. The Republicans just don't have enough to defend all these seats and go hard at the Democratic freshmen. And the Democrats are rolling in the stuff.

_______________________

Poplar Bluff, Mo: Thanks for taking questions. Is there a tentative date for the Senate to vote on the Defense Spending bill? It seems to me that they are wasting time on the MoveOn reprimand.

Jonathan Weisman: They'll probably wrap up by Tuesday or Wednesday. Time is running out.

_______________________

RE: Darth Vader: After hearing Hillary's Darth Vader reference, I'm now picturing Bush coldly staring at Colin Powell, then declaring, "I find your lack of faith disturbing!" A little TOO close to the mark for my money, given Bush's loyalist tendencies.

Jonathan Weisman: How do you write, "heavy metallic breathing"?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.:"Susan Collins may face a difficult race in Maine, but her opponent, Tom Andrews, is a pretty low-key guy, not a barn-burner, and it's tough to knock off moderates."

A comment on the above - my impression of the 2006 results was that moderate Republicans were rather more likely to be knocked off than more conservative ones. The conservative ones, after all, were presumably put in office by conservative voters who would be very reluctant to replace them with a Democrat whereas the voters who elected a moderate Republican might not see much difference switching to a Democrat to register disapproval of the Republican party in general, even if not of their incumbent in particular.

Jonathan Weisman: Look at Rick Santorum. He was a conservative in a swing state and he was trounced. Ditto George Allen (well, not trounced). The real moderate loser was Lincoln Chafee but he was in a very Democratic state and was badly bloodied in a primary.

In contrast, Olympia Snowe sailed to victory in Maine.

_______________________

Re: Obama: Um, did you really just joke about Obama blowing up the Sears Tower, or were you thinking Osama, but wrote Obama? Either way, not funny.

Jonathan Weisman: I apologize.

_______________________

Cortez, Colo., needs logic class: Why does Cortez assume that the 30-36 percent who approve of Bush actually vote? As the 2000 and 2004 elections show, the 50-60 percent of people who do vote are pretty evenly divided.

Jonathan Weisman: That's what I said.

_______________________

Jena 6: Has anyone on the Hill responded to the rather remarkable protest yesterday? It seems to me that this is something that both party's candidates ought to pay attention to. Folks may not remember that in the '50's, the Republican party was the party advocating Civil Rights, right up until Lyndon Johnson made it a Democratic one. I would think that the various candidates would want to establish their civil rights cred pretty quick.

Jonathan Weisman: It was a remarkable rally, and there were a fair number of press releases on it. But really, there are two issues that are consuming all attention up here, Iraq and the S-CHIP deal. Congress can barely do one thing at a time. Asking these guys to do three things is really taxing their capacities.

_______________________

Savannah, Ga.: I honestly don't know where to begin with you, Jonathan. "There are pockets where that is not true, especially African-American counties in the south where voting rates are truly abysmal." I guess a decade of vote-caging and illegal purging of voter lists by Republicans certainly wouldn't have anything to do with decreased black turnout in the South, eh? And this gem: "the Democratic leadership promised that this round of Iraq debates would be different, that they would take a less confrontational tack and really reach out to Republicans to find a bipartisan consensus..." This is just blaming the victim, Jonathan. You and I both know that Republicans would fight anything Harry and Nancy would agree to do, as they've abundantly displayed. The fact that Harry and Nancy are okay with this abuse doesn't make it right, or good.

Jonathan Weisman: Well, Savannah, you can begin anywhere you want. I grew up in the South. I'm not suggesting there is not a legacy of disenfranchisement, and dirty tricks happen every election. Look at the fliers that went out in predominantly black Prince Georges County here in greater D.C., attesting to the support of Michael Steele Democrats, as if Michael Steele was a Democrat. But in a recent trip to Union County, S.C., I found an African-American population that was angry at Bush but so disheartened that few of them were planning to vote.

As for blaming the victim, when you run the show, you have responsibilities that you didn't have in the minority.

_______________________

Your perception of Senate options on the war: I'm clearly living in a different world than you -- I just saw the Senate reject Reed-Levin (which is essentially non-binding) and show same or less support for intermediate legislative options like the Webb amendment. In my reality, Senate Dems have tried to find some common ground but it just ain't there. While the rest of the country has moved remarkably far in the past year on the war, Senate Republicans haven't moved an inch.

Jonathan Weisman: Actually, the Webb amendment received 56 votes, four short of the number needed. Levin-Reed was binding, and it received 47 votes.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: I can't agree with your finding the Republican attack on the Betrayus ad marvelous. It was repulsive and no more deserving of praise in any way than are serial killers who knock off a prodigious number of victims. But you can find what they did marvelous because you don't give a hoot about how Rove and Bush are shredding our democracy.

Jonathan Weisman: Oy, I didn't say marvelous. I said effective. I seem to have stirred the hornet's nest this morning.

_______________________

Old City, DC: Look, it's very simple. When the Republicans were in charge, the very hint of a possible fillibuster was enough for the Post to write story after story about the Dems obstructionist ways, how fillibusters were historically tied to blocking civil rights legislation, etc... You couldn't get enough of the F-word.

Now the shoe's on the other foot, and the Republican minority has used the fillibuster more than three times as often as any other minority in the nation's history, and all we're treated to is "parliamentary maneuvering" and, as one story headlined today, "Democrats Fail to Pass Anti-War Bill".

Why not "Republican Fillibuster Thwarts Pro-Troop Bill". You're in deep, deep denial my friend.

Jonathan Weisman: Since I have been covering Congress since well before the Democratic takeover, I have to object to your characterization. We were extremely critical of the GOP's inability to get anything done and reach compromise. We have used the word "filibuster" over and over. In most of the votes this week, Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell had made a deal that 60 votes would be needed for passage. Therefore, the votes this week have not been to break a filibuster.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Any word about how worried the Republican party is about Sen. Stevens?

Jonathan Weisman: I was just chatting last night with Rep. Jack Kingston, who brought the subject up unbidden. They are really worried.

_______________________

University of Alaska at Fairbanks: Any polling data out there (early yet I know) to indicate that anti-war types may just stay home next year at election time instead of voting for pro-war Democrats or Democrats who enable the Bush war in Iraq?

In other words, any voter backlash to the failure of Dems and MoveOn to get this war over with?

Jonathan Weisman: Actually, to the contrary. Congress is more unpopular with Democrats than with Republicans, a clear sign that they are angry about their inability to get things done, especially on the war. But Democrats hold a really strong lead on Republicans in generic polling and Democrats still seem more energized than Republicans.

_______________________

New York City: True or false? There are no House Democrats currently under investigation by Congress or any other law enforement body for either ethics or criminal violations. No House or Senate Democrats are under suspicion of anything.

Jonathan Weisman: False, Alan Mollohan of West Virginia is under investigation. Bill Jefferson has been indicted. And now Rep. Filner has an ethics investigation hanging over him.

_______________________

Admire Your Work: Jonathan, whatever nest you've stirred, you're a helluva reporter and at least you have the courgae to answer difficult questions with honesty and much needed humor at times!

Jonathan Weisman: Thank you, and on that note, I have to sign off.

Thanks everyone. It was fun.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over 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.