WASHINGTON – The government watchdog overseeing economic stimulus spending said Thursday that, in its rush to take credit for saving hundreds of thousands of jobs, the Obama administration was overly confident in its job-counting and did not acknowledge significant errors in the figures.

Numbers released last month identified more than 640,000 jobs linked to stimulus projects around the country. Despite warning signs that the numbers were flawed, the White House said the public could have confidence in them and they proved the administration was on track save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of next year.

Since then, tens of thousands of problems have been documented, from the substantive to the clerical. Republicans have been able to use those flaws to attack what so far is the signature domestic policy of Obama’s presidency.

The criticism has resonated, even though economic data shows that overall government efforts, from President George W. Bush’s bank bailout to President Barak Obama’s stimulus, have improved the economy. Fewer than 1 in 10 Americans think the stimulus has created any jobs so far, according to a CBS News poll this week.

Earl Devaney, the watchdog whose group compiled and released the job data, said he could not certify the numbers were correct. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., asked whether the administration should have been more conservative and acknowledged it had “no idea” whether the jobs were being counted correctly.

“Wouldn’t that be a fairer way to put it?” Issa said.

“I like that statement,” DeSeve replied.

The White House said Thursday that it had been up front about the errors. Spokeswoman Elizabeth Oxhorn noted that, on the day the figures were released, Vice President Joe Biden said, “This is an unprecedented undertaking. And we know – we know that it’s not 100 percent accurate.”

The Obama administration has expressed varying degrees of confidence in the numbers, depending on who was talking and when:

-Sept. 23, White House communications director Anita Dunn: “It is not going to be a perfect process here at the beginning.”
-Oct. 29, White House press release: “These reports have been reviewed for weeks, errors have been spotted and corrected, and additional layers of review by state and local governments have further improved the data quality.”

-Oct. 30, Biden, in a White House press release: “These reports are strong confirmation that the Recovery Act is responsible for over one million jobs so far.”

-Oct. 30, White House economic adviser Jared Bernstein, in a report: “Focusing on (mistakes in the reports) risks obscuring a key point: Real-time reporting about job creation, with reports coming from thousands of projects all across the country, has never even been attempted before.”

-Oct. 31, Obama: “It is clear that the recovery act has now created and saved more than a million jobs.”

-Nov. 1, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, when asked by NBC News whether the 640,000 figure was fact or spin: “This is a fact.”

-Nov. 6, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, in remarks to the Chamber of Commerce: “We know for a fact that Recovery Act investments have created or saved more than 640,000 direct jobs so far. These are real, identifiable jobs directly funded by the Act.”

-Thursday, Oxhorn, in a statement: “We have been clear from the beginning that the data would not be 100 percent perfect, but would provide a meaningful indication of Recovery Act job impact.”

Despite pressure to leave China having racked up political wins, President Obama found time today to sightsee and marvel at the Great Wall.

Wrapping up his visit, President Obama’s thoughts were spread across a myriad of issues, and he even hinted at revealing his strategy regarding Afghanistan.

“This decision will put us on a path towards ending the war”, said Obama.

The President also hinted at a troop increase, as he said the new strategy would not immediately bring a smaller U.S. footprint in Afghanistan.

In response to critics’ concerns that 9/11 suspect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be tried with the legal rights of Americans, President Obama replied, “I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.”

Meanwhile, the President met with China’s Premiere in the spirit of deepening ties with China.

“A relationship that used to be focused just on economic and trade issues is now expanding to deal with a whole host of global issues in which U.S.-China cooperation is critical”, said Obama.

The President’s meetings in China – sprinkled with entertainment – did produce a pledge.

The U.S. will offer targets for climate-warming emissions cuts if China does, lifting expectations out of next month’s climate summit.

Not all proposals were met with agreement, however.

China showed no softening on its control of their currency, as they’re keeping its prices low to boost exports in competition with the United States.

Another area not wrought with concessions was China’s stance on Iran and its nuclear program, due to its oil interests in the country.

Next on President Obama’s itinerary is a visit to South Korea, which will undoubtedly include discussions of the country’s recent scuffles with their neighbors to the north.

“What’s important is that the two President’s will get together and they will stand in unison conveying the same message”, said Lee Jung-Hoon, Dean of Underwood Intl. College.

President Obama’s next task on his tour of Asia: getting North Korea back to the nuclear bargaining table.

Protestors have already begun gathering ahead of his arrival.

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENTON VETERANS DAY
Memorial Amphitheater
Arlington National Cemetery
Arlington, Virginia

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you so much.  Thank you.  Please, be seated.

Thank you, Secretary Shinseki, for the generous introduction — more importantly, the extraordinary bravery in service to our country, both on and off the battlefield.  I want to thank our outstanding Vice President, Joe Biden, and his wonderful wife, Dr. Jill Biden, for being here today.  We want to thank the Bidens for their son, Beau’s, service as well; we’re glad he just got back from Iraq.

We want to say a special word of thanks to Brigadier General Karl Horst, who’s the Commander of the Military District of Washington, for being here, and for your lifetime of distinguished service to our nation.  To Gene Crayton, president of the Paralyzed Veterans of America, thank you for being here.  And to all the veterans’ service organizations for the extraordinary work, day in, day out on behalf of our nation’s heroes.

To the members of our armed forces and the veterans who are here today:  I am deeply honored and humbled to spend Veterans Day with you in this sacred place where generations of heroes have come to rest — and generations of Americans have come to show their gratitude.

There are many honors and responsibilities that come with this job.  But none is more profound than serving as Commander-in-Chief.  Yesterday, I visited the troops at Fort Hood.  We gathered in remembrance of those we recently lost.  We paid tribute to the lives they led.  And there was something that I saw in them; something that I see in the eyes of every soldier and sailor, airman, Marine and Coast Guardsman that I have had the privilege to meet in this country and around the world — and that thing is determination.

In this time of war, we gather here mindful that the generation serving today already deserves a place alongside previous generations for the courage they have shown and the sacrifices that they have made.  In an era where so many acted only in pursuit of narrow self-interest, they’ve chosen the opposite.  They chose to serve the cause that is greater than self; many even after they knew they’d be sent into harm’s way.  And for the better part of a decade, they have endured tour after tour in distant and difficult places; they have protected us from danger; and they have given others the opportunity for a better life.

So to all of them — to our veterans, to the fallen, and to their families — there is no tribute, no commemoration, no praise that can truly match the magnitude of your service and your sacrifice.

This is a place where it is impossible not to be moved by that sacrifice.  But even as we gather here this morning, people are gathering all across America, not only to express thanks of a grateful nation, but to tell stories that demand to be told.  They’re stories of wars whose names have come to define eras; battles that echo throughout history.  They’re stories of patriots who sacrificed in pursuit of a more perfect union:  of a grandfather who marched across Europe; of a friend who fought in Vietnam; of a sister who served in Iraq.  They’re the stories of generations of Americans who left home barely more than boys and girls, became men and women, and returned home heroes.

And when these Americans who had dedicated their lives to defending this country came home, many settled on a life of service, choosing to make their entire lives a tour of duty.  Many chose to live a quiet life, trading one uniform and set of responsibilities for another — doctor, engineer, teacher, mom, dad.  They bought homes, raised families, built businesses.  They built the greatest middle class that the world has ever known.  Some put away their medals, stayed humble about their service, and moved on.  Some, carrying shrapnel and scars, found that they couldn’t.

We call this a holiday.  But for many veterans, it’s another day of memories that drive them to live their lives each day as best as they possibly can.  For our troops, it is another day in harm’s way.  For their families, it is another day to feel the absence of a loved one, and the concern for their safety.  For our wounded warriors, it is another day of slow and arduous recovery.  And in this national cemetery, it is another day when grief remains fresh.  So while it is important and proper that we mark this day, it is far more important we spend all our days determined to keep the promises that we’ve made to all who answer this country’s call.

Carved into the marble behind me are the words of our first Commander-in-Chief:  “When we assumed the soldier, we did not lay aside the citizen.”  Just as the contributions that our servicemen and women make to this nation don’t end when they take off their uniform, neither do our obligations to them.  And when we fulfill those obligations, we aren’t just keeping faith with our veterans; we are keeping faith with the ideals of service and sacrifice upon which this republic was founded.

If we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that there have been times where we as a nation have betrayed that sacred trust.  Our Vietnam veterans served with great honor.  They often came home greeted not with gratitude or support, but with condemnation and neglect.  That’s something that will never happen again.  To them and to all who have served, in every battle, in every war, we say that it’s never too late to say thank you.  We honor your service.  We are forever grateful.  And just as you have not forgotten your missing comrades, neither, ever, will we.  Our servicemen and women have been doing right by America for generations.  And as long as I am Commander-in-Chief, America’s going to do right by them.

That is my message to all veterans today.  That is my message to all who serve in harm’s way.  To the husbands and wives back home doing the parenting of two.  To the parents who watch their sons and daughters go off to war, and the children who wonder when mom and dad is coming home.  To all our wounded warriors, and to the families who laid a loved one to rest.  America will not let you down.  We will take care of our own.

And to those who are serving in far-flung places today, when your tour ends, when you see our flag, when you touch our soil, you will be home in an America that is forever here for you just as you’ve been there for us.  That is my promise — our nation’s promise — to you.

Ninety-one years ago today, the battlefields of Europe fell quiet as World War I came to a close.  But we don’t mark this day each year as a celebration of victory, as proud of that victory as we are.  We mark this day as a celebration of those who made victory possible.  It’s a day we keep in our minds the brave men and women of this young nation — generations of them — who above all else believed in and fought for a set of ideals.  Because they did, our country still stands; our founding principles still shine; nations around the world that once knew nothing but fear now know the blessings of freedom.

That is why we fight — in hopes of a day when we no longer need to.  And that is why we gather at these solemn remembrances and reminders of war — to recommit ourselves to the hard work of peace.

There will be a day before long when this generation of servicemen and women step out of uniform.  They will build families and lives of their own.  God willing, they will grow old.  And someday, their children, and their children’s children, will gather here to honor them.

Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

WASHINGTON  – President Barack Obama’s political influence a year after his election is being tested as voters cast ballots in Virginia and New Jersey, two states he’s worked hard to keep in Democratic hands. A handful of congressional and mayoral races and a same-sex union initative also are among the featured face-offs this Election Day.

Obama has sought to ensure that Democrats not only win the governor’s races but also pick up a GOP-held congressional seat in upstate New York. In doing so, Obama raised the stakes of a low-enthusiasm off-year election season – and risked political embarrassment if any lost.

All three could.

While political insiders in Washington and elsewhere focused on the political implications of the governors races in Virginia and New Jersey, discussions on Twitter focused on the same-sex union initiative in Maine, with the phrases “VoteNoOn1″ and “Maine” landing in the site’s top trending topics. The measure would repeal a bill passed by the Legislature allowing same-sex marriages.

Heading into Tuesday’s elections, Democrat gubernatorial candidate R. Creigh Deeds was trailing Republican Bob McDonnell in polls by double digits in Virginia. In a three-way race in New Jersey, Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine was in a close race with Republican Chris Christie and independent Chris Daggett. And in the race to fill the vacant 23rd Congressional District seat in New York, Democrat Bill Owens was in a tight fight with conservative Doug Hoffman after the GOP’s hand-picked candidate bowed out over the weekend.

Elsewhere, California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi is expected to maintain the Democratic Party’s hold on the open 10th Congressional District seat near San Francisco, while New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to cruise to a third term. Atlanta, Houston, Boston, Detroit and Pittsburgh also will elect mayors, while voters in Maine and Washington weigh in on same-sex unions and voters in Ohio decide whether to allow casinos.

To be sure, it’s easy to overanalyze the results of such a small number of elections in a few places. The results will only offer hints about the national political landscape and clues to the public’s attitudes. And the races certainly won’t predict what will happen in the 2010 midterm elections.

“The results of these elections tend to be overread,” former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Tuesday on NBC’s “Today.” “These are local races. There’s 18,000 lifetimes between now and next November.”

But, given that Democrats control the White House and Congress, defeats in Virginia – a new swing state in national elections – or New Jersey – a Democratic stronghold – would be setbacks for the White House, even though both states having long histories of electing governors from a political party opposite that of the president.

After all, this is a president who won a year ago in an electoral landslide after building a fundraising and organizational juggernaut that attracted scores of new voters into what Obama loyalists have called a movement. And this is a party that has comfortable majorities in the House and Senate – and that controls governor’s mansions in Virginia and New Jersey. As the Democratic Party chief, Obama had little choice but to work hard to elect Corzine and Deeds; doing otherwise would have been seen by the base as a breach of duty.

So, he campaigned several times for Corzine and raised money for Deeds. Obama also was featured in campaign advertisements for both. He characterized the success of their candidacies as key components for the White House to make good on its political promises and advance its agenda. And he deployed the Democratic National Committee and his own political campaign arm, Organizing for America, to ensure the swarms of new voters he attracted in 2008 turn out even if he’s not on the ballot.

Of the two races, a Republican victory in Virginia would be the most telling about potential trouble ahead for Democrats as they compete in swing states next fall. Long reliably Republican in national races, Virginia is a new swing state. It’s home to a slew of northern bellwether counties filled with swing-voting independents who carried Obama to victory last fall, the first Democrat to win the state in a White House race since 1964. Rapidly growing counties like Loudoun and Prince William swung toward Democrats in the 2005 governor’s race, previewing an Obama win three years later.

Conversely, New Jersey is a traditional Democratic-leaning state with an incumbent Democratic governor. As such, it’s the trickier of the two for Republicans to win – and yet the GOP just might.

By: SARAH HOYE
Media General News Service
One professor called it spiteful. Another said it was far-fetched.

Those were the reactions to a request by three Republican congressmen that President Barack Obama get the permission of Congress before he accepts the Nobel Peace Prize.

On Monday, U.S Reps. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida, Cliff Stearns of Florida and Ron Paul of Texas sent Obama a letter, first congratulating him, and then requesting him to “obtain Congress’ consent before formally accepting the Nobel Prize.”

The letter cites a provision of the U.S. Constitution they argue prohibits a president from accepting a gift from a foreign entity.

“With every great honor, however, comes great responsibility, not the least of which is the president’s constitutional responsibility to receive the consent of Congress before formally accepting this award,” Brown-Waite said in a statement.

Nonsense, say those familiar with law and politics.

Fletcher Baldwin, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Florida, said the letter “shows a very spiteful attitude.”

“First of all, we had two other presidents who sent letters to Congress saying, ‘Look, I won’t take the money,’” Baldwin said. “Teddy [Roosevelt] sent a letter … but certainly did not ask for permission from Congress.”

President Theodore Roosevelt was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1906 while in office for “brokering peace between Russia and Japan.” Roosevelt declined to keep the prize money and instead established a foundation, according to the Theodore Roosevelt Association.

Brown-Waite’s letter might have more to do with politics than presidential formalities, said Susan MacManus, a political science professor at the University of South Florida.

“You might not like someone, but when someone gets an award, you let it go,” MacManus said. “Some of it has to do with their constituents, who are all older and from conservative districts.”

Brown-Waite did not return telephone calls Wednesday seeking comment.

Bruce Jacob, a professor of law at Stetson University, called the request “farfetched.”

The constitutional provision that was cited would not apply to the Nobel, Jacob said, and added that his donating of the funds actually strengthens the president’s case.

“I don’t think they’re [Nobel Foundation] acting as a foreign state. … They’re acting as a private body,” Jacob said. “Throughout history, presidents have accepted gifts and then turned them over; it’s common practice.”

Stearns disagrees.

“The Norwegian Parliament elects the Nobel Commission and, therefore, Nobel Prizes are awards presented by a foreign state. In addition, U.S. law (5 USC Title 7342) sets conditions under which the President and other federal employees can accept a gift from a foreign state without a separate action of Congress,” Stearns said in a statement.

The section of the Constitution cited by the letter should be interpreted to mean the president is not to be tainted or bribed, Baldwin said.

“I think it’s trivial,” he said.

Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for the creation of a “new climate in international politics,” the Nobel committee said. The president said he would donate the $1.4 million prize money to charity.

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama seriously considered Hillary Rodham Clinton for the vice presidency, even though his top aides weren’t enthusiastic about it, his presidential campaign manager says in a new memoir.

“Neither Ax (top-level adviser David Axelrod) nor I were fans of the Hillary option,” David Plouffe, who ran Obama’s 2008 race, said in his memoir, portions of which were published by Time magazine Thursday.

“What surprised me was that Obama was clearly thinking more seriously about picking Hillary Clinton than Ax and I had realized,” Plouffe wrote, describing a meeting the three had in late spring of last year when it became clear Obama would be the party’s standard-bearer.

Plouffe said that by early August, Obama had narrowed his list down to Sen. Joe Biden – now vice president – along with Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana and Tim Kaine of Virginia. Plouffe also wrote that “we had initially received a lot of advice from many of her (Clinton) supporters to pick her, though this ‘advice’ was perhaps more accurately described as subtle pressure.”

WASHINGTON  – A senior administration official says President Barack Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops to Afghanistan as are needed to keep al-Qaida at bay.

The assessment comes from an official who has been involved in the president’s discussions with his war council about Afghanistan strategy. The official was authorized to speak to The Associated

Press about the discussions but not to be identified by name because the talks are ongoing.

Aides say the president’s final decision on Afghanistan strategy and troop levels is still at least two weeks away, but the emerging thinking suggests he would be unlikely to favor a large military ramp-up of the kind being advocated by his top commander in Afghanistan.

WASHINGTON -  President Barack Obama will tell the nation in a prime-time address precisely how he wants to expand health care, including what his spokesman says will be a fresh argument for the much-debated government-run insurance option.

“What we’re going to hear tonight is, the president’s going to speak clearly and directly to the American people about what’s in this bill for them,” press secretary Robert Gibbs said Wednesday.

Making the rounds of morning news shows, Gibbs said Obama will highlight his vision of a health care overhaul that secures the insurance people now have, makes affordable care accessible to those without it and cuts insurance costs for familie and small businesses.

Discussing Obama’s thinking, a senior administration official said the president will make a case for why he believes a government-run option is the best way to introduce greater competition into the system. The official, who discussed the speech on grounds of anonymity because preparations remain under way, also said Obama would offer to hear new ideas and he would not suggest any veto scenario at this time.

Even as Obama prepared to speak to a joint session of Congress and a live television audience, the leader of the influential Senate Finance Committee raced to broker a bipartisan agreement on
the president’s top domestic priority.

The White House set a high bar for the rare presidential address, acknowledging the huge stakes and creating big expectations about the level of specificity Obama would provide.

The president has stressed repeatedly the broad goals for the sweeping health care overhaul he seeks, but has left the details to lawmakers. Through a hot summer of angry debate, he lost his grip on the process.

Aiming to reclaim it at a pivotal moment and open a final push for a bill, Obama said, “We do intend to get something done this year.”

“I’m open to new ideas,” the president said in an interview Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America” in which he previewed the themes of his speech. “We’re not being rigid and ideological about this thing.”

Gibbs said the country needs “additional choice and competition so that those that are on the private insurance market aren’t just dealing with one competitor to try to get quality, affordable
insurance.”

“The public option is a way of putting a check on insurance companies,” he said.

Asked pointblank if Obama was preparing to demand a public option, Gibbs said only that he “will outline what he thinks the value of the public option is.”

Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele dismissed the proposal in a separate interview, saying “the idea that the federal government can come in and be the same as Allstate in providing insurance, that’s ridiculous.”

Gibbs argued that a government-run option is “supported by a majority of people in this country” and said that currently “there’s nobody to compete” in a situation where a private health care insurance company dominates the market.

With Obama’s approximately 35-minute speech still being written, much by the president himself, White House officials said the president will “answer all the major questions” – including the sticky issue of how to pay for getting coverage for the 50 million Americans who lack it.

Obama will appear before lawmakers a day after their return from an August recess marked by contentious town halls and much misinformation and confusion about what a health care overhaul may look like.

A senior administration official said Obama has ceased worrying about whether he gets any Republican participation. “If they don’t want to, we can’t worry about that,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely discuss behind-the-scenes thinking.

But that is no longer Obama’s biggest difficulty, a fact underscored by the conflicting advice he was getting from within his own party.

Rep. Zack Space, D-Ohio, a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog coalition, said Obama should “appeal to both sides of the aisle, and to everyone involved in this situation, to embrace a sense of compromise and moderation.”

But Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., co-chairman of the House Progressive Caucus, said he wanted Obama to state his unequivocal support for a government-run health insurance option to compete with private companies, and to clearly distance himself from the two alternatives now circulating.

One of those would structure a public plan so that it would be triggered only if private insurance companies weren’t providing enough affordable choices in certain areas; the other would set up nonprofit co-ops. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, circulated a proposal that would cost $900 billion over 10 years and guarantee coverage for nearly all Americans, regardless of medical problems. Fees on insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry would finance tax credits to help expand coverage. Baucus’ panel is the only one of the five involved in health care not to complete a bill yet, and the only one still searching for a bipartisan compromise.

One provision would fine families up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance, essentially requiring that everyone have medical coverage, much like the case with car insurance. Obama rejected a mandate, and fines, during his presidential campaign.

Baucus asked his “Gang of Six” bipartisan negotiators to report back with suggestions by Wednesday morning. “I made that clear, that the bipartisan effort will have more effect if there’s
agreement prior to the president’s address,” he said.

But few appeared ready to do as Baucus wants and move before hearing from the president. “That’s the cart before the horse, as they say in Maine,” said Sen. Olympia Snowe, a moderate Republican being courted by the White House.

Like bipartisanship, prospects for a public insurance plan also dimmed. It is not in Baucus’ plan, and two prominent House Democrats backed away from it Tuesday.

It is this issue that has become Obama’s main quandary: Liberal lawmakers say they won’t vote for legislation that doesn’t include a public plan. But Republicans and many moderate Democrats won’t vote for one with it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Obama told her and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid during a White House meeting Tuesday that his message would essentially be: “If you have a better idea, put it on the table.”

Gibbs appeared on NBC’s “Today” show and CBS’s “The Early Show,” and Steele was interviewed on the “Today” show.

BY CIVITAS
RALEIGH, N.C. – With President Barack Obama set to address Congress Wednesday evening to plead his case for overhauling the health insurance and health care industry, a new Civitas Flash Poll released today finds voters deeply divided on their support for the plan.

According to the poll of 662 registered voters, nearly an identical number support the proposal as oppose it.  Of those surveyed, 47.6 percent said they somewhat or strongly supported the health care reform plan presented by President Obama and Congressional Democrats, 47 percent of voters said they were opposed to the plan and 5.4 percent said they were unsure.

“The health care proposal by the President and Congress has deeply divided the nation,” said Francis De Luca, executive director of the Civitas Institute.  “Feelings on the plan are quite intense, with very few people in the middle.  Basically, you either support the plan or you abhor it.”

A reflection of the deep divisions is that roughly three-fourths of voters said they either strongly supported (35.4%) or strongly opposed (40.6%) the plan.

“Candidate Obama pledged to be a uniting force for our country.  However, the actions and proposals by President Obama and the Democratic majority in Congress are driving the nation apart,” added De Luca.

Additionally, only 20.5 percent of voters think the cost of health care will go down and 27.3 percent of voters think the quality of their health care will get better if the President’s plan passes.

“Regardless of their support of the President’s proposals, very few think it will actually make things better.  It’s apparent much of the President’s support on the plan is not from people who think it will improve health care, but from their personal support of him,” concluded De Luca.

The Civitas Flash Poll study of 665 registered voters was conducted September 2-3 by Insider Advantage of Atlanta, Georgia.  It has a margin of error of +/- 3.9 percent.  Other factors such as weighting may introduce additional error.