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.

Washington Post White House reporter Michael Fletcher was online Thursday, Oct. 25 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.

The transcript follows.

Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts

____________________

Michael Fletcher: Good morning, all. This will be my final political chat, as I am moving on to another beat at the paper. So let's get started.

_______________________

Washington: Has any White House reporter ever asked the president if he would have supported the tax increases FDR put in place to support World War II? He seems so convinced that we shouldn't pay for this war; I would love to know if that's because one shouldn't increase taxes during wars, or if this particular conflict is different.

Michael Fletcher: I have never heard President Bush asked the question you raise. Despite what you say, I think President Bush does want us to pay for this war--even if he didn't, we certainly are paying. But Bush is generally against tax increases as he believes they stifle economic growth. So his idea is to pay for the war by cutting back elsewhere in the budget.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Is it true that the White House deleted CDC testimony that was supposed to be delivered to congress yesterday because it tied an increase in human diseases to climate change? How does the White House explain the exceptionally high temperatures in October for the past few years -- much higher than previously recorded? Why isn't the media making more out of the California fire connection to climate change?

Michael Fletcher: It is clear that the testimony was cut, but it is hard to know why. The White House says the testimony went through routine interagency reviews, which resulted in cutting Dr. Judy Gerberding's congressional testimony in half. Some at CDC saw this as eviscerating her testimony, although Gerberding publicly has played the changes down as insignificant. In the past several months, President Bush has been more vocal in talking about the need to address climate change, a position that is politically popular and seems to reflect his evolved thinking on the matter. He, of course, remains opposed to internationally imposed caps on greenhouse gas emissions -- a policy endorsed by many environmentalists, but one that Bush says will stagnate growing economies and, in any event, not be followed by large greenhouse gas emitters, including China, India and Brazil. As for what you call the high temperatures in October, I have not heard the White House explain those. And I think the media has not made more of the California fire connection to climate change because the evidence linking them is probably tenuous, at best.

_______________________

Windsor Mill, Md.: Have Bush's recent address to the Cubans and his repeated assertions that Iran is the world's leading supporter of terrorism increased or diminished our international standing and support from other nations? Of the candidates running for president, who has the greatest ability to reach out to other nations and rebuild our international image, not only with our enemies but also with our friends or former friends? Specifically, don't you think it's high time to repair relations with the French?

washingtonpost.com: Bush Vows to Stay the Course On U.S. Policy Toward Cuba (Post, Oct. 25)

Michael Fletcher: Hmm, three questions or more wrapped in there, Windsor Mill. I think that, if anything, our constant wagging of a finger at Cuba has served to bolster Castro's regime. Cuba strikes me as a country that would be prime for constructive engagement by the U.S. If capitalism is the be all and end all and the only economic system compatible with freedom, then I think engaging Cuba would prove that. As I compare Cuba with other Caribbean nations, I see a society that is somewhat better educated, has better health care, and lower crime. Of course, people there don't have the personal freedom to travel about and many opportunities are limited .Neither do they enjoy democracy -- all things that are significant But all of that could change with engagement -- but that policy has remained unchanged for decades, through both Republican and Democratic administrations. Iran is another matter. Ever since the hostage crisis, relations have been basically hostile. ran is basically fighting a proxy war against the U.S. in Iraq. Now one might argue that it is for good reason that Iran fights -- the U.S. has invaded two of its neighbors, Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving Iran vulnerable. The theocracy there is hardly democratic, and seems to be pushing back on rights that had been slowly won in recent years. Also, Iran's nuclear ambitions worry the U.S. and others, including Germany. So it is hard to say how our posture toward Iran has affected our "standing." As for the French, it seems that relations have been improving steadily for several years.

_______________________

Romney's so-called slip of the tongue: If he had just said Obama instead of Osama, I might buy the explanation given by Romney's spokesperson, but the governor mentioned Obama's full name, after which most reasonable, thinking people would realize that they had made a gaffe (assuming it was not deliberate) and apologize, or at the very least apologize themselves afterwards, and not just let a representative explain it away. Maybe Romney needs Ann Coulter as a running mate, so that anything he says sounds mild. (Speaking of Coulter, after her remarks about the country being better off if all Jews became Christians, she appeared -- as usual -- on Fox News, and she and Bill O'Reilly predictably concentrated not on the hatefulness of her comments but how persecuted Christians are in the U.S.).

washingtonpost.com: The Trail: Romney's Slip of the Tongue (washingtonpost.com, Oct. 23)

Michael Fletcher: I have to believe that Romney's gaffe was just that, a gaffe. Sometimes when speaking publicly people slip up...just ask President Bush. Most of all, I don't see how a crack like that helps Romney. As for apologizing, I think he probably doesn't see it as a big deal. As for Ann Coulter, I have to give her credit for being a master of self promotion and for keeping her books moving off the shelves of bookstores. As a first-time author this year, I have to say I wish I could sell that many books. That said, I would not want to use her tactics to do so.

_______________________

Washington: While I bow to no person in my dislike of President Bush, I don't understand the brouhaha over the altered testimony on global warming. Isn't this par for the course? I was a fairly high-ranking Health and Human Services employee during the Clinton administration and we always ran testimony by the White House for their review and possible editing prior to presenting it on the Hill.

washingtonpost.com: Sen. Boxer Seeks Answers On Redacted Testimony (Post, Oct. 25)

Michael Fletcher: It is routine, but this practice has been taken to new lengths by the Bush administration which tied politics to most every aspect of the federal government. That may have been perfectly legal, but it was unprecedented...even though, as you say, other administrations did it, if to a lesser degree. Add to that the Bush administration's efforts to push back against science to promote positions embraced by many Christian conservatives (see the president's comments on intelligent design, and his position on stem cells)and you have an atmosphere where every edit made by the White House on a matter like climate change is suspicious. Thus the brouhaha, even if it is, as Gerberding said, making "a mountain out of a molehill."

_______________________

Miami: Just before the House foreign relations committee hearing, a woman with fake blood on her hands encircled Sec. Condi Rice. Yes, the security people took the woman away, but how did she manage to threaten a Cabinet Secretary in the first place? Do these protestors think members of the Bush administration are fair game, and how far does that go before someone does something violent to someone like Condi Rice, Robert Gates or some other employee? Also, I saw a man with a back pack being escorted out of this same committee later for holding up a protest sign. Where is the security screening these days? Aren't there any safeguards to prohibit stuff from coming into congressional buildings that could cause chaos or even fires?

washingtonpost.com: Antiwar Protester Accosts Rice at House Hearing (Post, Oct. 25)

Michael Fletcher: I guess fake blood does not come up when one passes through the metal detectors and X-ray machines used to screen visitors to public hearings and other sessions on Capitol Hill. In short, there was no reason for the woman to be stopped, it seems. Likewise, a backpack is just a backpack. They are allowed, once screened. That said, there is a certain respect I think should be accorded to public officials even as protesters vigorously make their point. But that line is different for many individuals. And hopefully, the line is drawn well short of violence.

_______________________

Osama/Obama: Ted Kennedy made the same slip of the tongue when he was speaking before a black women's group last year. The clip was on YouTube (and might still be there). The look on the moderator's face when he says "Osama" is just priceless.

washingtonpost.com: The Kennedy clip (YouTube)

Michael Fletcher: Thanks for sharing that.

_______________________

Washington: Thanks for all the hours you've spent chatting with us! What's the new beat?

Michael Fletcher: Thanks for sharing these chats and providing the questions that keep them moving. I always enjoy engaging readers in this forum. In my new gig, I will be a national economics writer traveling the U.S. to write stories illustrating the impact of large economic trends. Now I have an entirely new area to learn about, which is one of the blessings of this line of work.

_______________________

Vienna, Va.: Interesting story today by your colleague on Henry Waxman. What's the over/under on the number of investigations Waxman will do if Sen. Clinton becomes president? I'd put up two -- and bet the under.

washingtonpost.com: White House Feels Waxman's Oversight Gaze (Post, Oct. 25)

Michael Fletcher: I'd bet along with you, mainly because I like winning money, too. But, you know, Waxman is following a long tradition. How many of the stories of the past year--fired U.S. attorneys, the politicization of routine government functions, political briefings at agencies--would we have heard if the GOP were still running Congress with Mr. Bush as president? And how many Whitewater, Travelgate, Who Killed Vince Foster (who committed suicide) and other things did we hear about when the GOP ran Congress and Mr. Clinton was president? It's kind of how our politics work these days, even if it maybe turns off a whole slew of people from the process.

_______________________

Rolla, Mo.: Sure, Gerberding is saying now that it is a "mountain out of a molehill," but that sounds like Christine Todd Whitman a few years ago, who toed the administration line on the environment and only spoke out after she left. What are the odds Gerberding will pen a book afterwords about her days at the CDC during the Bush years?

Michael Fletcher: It'll be interesting to see what she says about all of this once she is no longer part of the administration. The same might be said for others in the Bush government.

_______________________

Salinas, Calif.: Hi Michael. In response to Washington: President Bush may say that he won't raise taxes to pay for the war, but we're paying for it just the same (with our children still paying for it and their children as well). The twisted thing is that he's handing us the tab in true baby-boomer fashion -- putting it on the credit card. How can you have a balanced budget when the billions being spent to prosecute a war going into its fifth year are all off the books as emergency appropriations, with the notes held by foreign entities such as China? Just asking.

Michael Fletcher: Maybe I'll be able to give you an intelligent answer once I've written about economics for a while. It's hard (for me, at least) to know what the impact of deficits are. I keep hearing they are bad, but we keep running them and (so far) interest rates remain low and the economy seems to hum (until lately, at least). But maybe it is like a house of cards that one day will collapse.

_______________________

Washington: What is your opinion on Obama's call for John Tanner to resign? To what extend can one sentence be taken out of an entire speech? And to what extent can this one sentence erase a man's entire career as a civil rights attorney?

washingtonpost.com: Obama: DOJ Official Must Be Fired (washingtonpost.com, Oct. 19)

Michael Fletcher: It feels like a tough sanction for a statement for Tanner's tortured logic and butchered statement. Tanner said that voter identification requirements harm the elderly, which he said won't impact minorities as much as others because they "die first." Indeed, blacks have have shorter life expectancies than whites (I'm not sure about Asians and Hispanics)but the difference does not justify Tanner's statement. Just go to any voting place in a black community on Election Day, and you're sure to find many senior citizens voting. That said, should Tanner lose his job for that? Or is Sen. Obama playing a little politics? You be the judge.

_______________________

New York: Michael, is Bush's new fixation with Cuba a way of shoring up the Latino vote, given the GOP role in the failure of the immigration bill? Thanks.

Michael Fletcher: I don't know how many Latino votes President Bush wins with that position. Even in Miami, a new generation of Cuban Americans does not seem to have the strong anti-Castro feelings of their forbears. I think it is just one of those odd things in American politics where Cuba policy is untouchable and unchangeable under both Republican and Democratic presidents. I guess the only people who care deeply about this issues are those (whatever the number) who oppose Castro. So maybe there is no political gain in engaging Havana.

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: The economy seemed to hum because you were looking at averages. All the progress has been at the top. Look at the percent of the wealth of the U.S. held by the top 1 percent (or .1 percent) when Bush came in and what they hold now. All of the productivity gains by the working stiff have gone to the rich. This should be the main theme of your new job. Just look at the figures. (P.S. I am a mathematician.)

Michael Fletcher: Actually, that growing inequality is something I plan to focus on. Just to explain, I was answering that question only in the context of deficits, which I don't see as driving the inequality. But thanks for making the point.

_______________________

Michael Fletcher: Gotta run. I'm going to miss this. Maybe at some point after settling into my new gig, I can launch some sort of chat about the economy (are you listening, Arlington?). Anyway, take care. And thanks for the questions.

_______________________

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.