Subject: ​Correct The Record Monday January 5, 2015 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 14:15:29 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Monday January 5, 2015 Afternoon Roundup:*

*Tweets:*

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton
<https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> taught Cambodian youth the importance
of promoting & protecting human rights #HRC365
<https://twitter.com/hashtag/HRC365?src=hash>http://1.usa.gov/1f24SPP
<http://t.co/CjiHJjmRU3>[1/4/15, 11:00 a.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/551770117583814657>]

*Headlines:*

*Washington Post: Where is the white Southern Republican Bill Clinton on
race?
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/01/05/where-is-the-white-southern-republican-bill-clinton-on-race/>*

"As I sat in that theater where [President Clinton's] words and images
collided, it occurred to me that I could not recall a white Southern
Republican of presidential prominence — of any prominence, really — speak
as candidly about race, the dark days of segregation and the effect it had
on his or her conscience and political consciousness.​"

*Poughkeepsie Journal: Allida Black: “Highlights Clinton's accomplishments”
<http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/opinion/2014/12/31/letters-editor/21125675/>*

"Let us hear Hillary's call to 'never rest on [our] laurels. Never quit.
Never stop working to make the world a better place. That's our unfinished
business.'"

*Huffington Post opinion: Peter D. Rosenstein: “Americans will sleep better
when Hillary Rodham Clinton is in the White House”
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-d-rosenstein/americans-will-sleep-bett_b_6417236.html>*

“Americans and peace loving people across the globe will all sleep better
if Hillary Rodham Clinton takes the oath of office on January 20, 2017.”

*Wall Street Journal: “Clintons to Attend Mario Cuomo Funeral”
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-christie-to-attend-mario-cuomo-wake-1420478396>*

“Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton are set to attend the funeral of former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo on
Tuesday, according to spokesmen, while Vice President Joe Biden and New
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie are among political dignitaries expected to join
friends and family Monday at the wake.”

*New York Daily News: “Bill and Hillary Clinton to attend former Gov. Mario
Cuomo's funeral Tuesday”
<http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/bill-hillary-clinton-attend-mario-cuomo-funeral-blog-entry-1.2066298>*

“The Clintons and Cuomos have longstanding political and personal bonds.”

*U.S. News & World Report: “A Resolution for the Contenders”
<http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/charles-wheelan/2015/01/05/hillary-clinton-and-jeb-bush-should-run-like-theyre-not-afraid-to-lose>*

“Here is my resolution for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and ex-Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton: Run for president, and do it like you are not afraid
to lose.”

*Associated Press: “A Year Before 2016, Iowa Full of Presidential Hopefuls”
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_2016_IOWA_MOVES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>*

“While Democrats and Republicans are waiting for Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Jeb Bush and other major prospects to formally kick off the 2016 race in
the state with the first presidential caucuses, other lesser known or more
unlikely aspirants are already active in Iowa, letting everyone know
they're available.”

*CNN: “Why U.S. needs to stay in Afghanistan”
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/05/opinion/bergen-keep-troops-in-afghanistan/index.html>*

“An easy way for potential Democratic Party presidential candidates such as
Hillary Clinton to distinguish their national security policies from
Obama's would be to say that they are in favor of some kind of long-term
U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and to argue that it would be needed
to avoid an Iraq-style outcome there.”

*Washington Free Beacon: “Chuck Todd: Hillary Clinton Is a Similar
Politician to Obama, Not Like Her Husband”
<http://freebeacon.com/politics/chuck-todd-hillary-clinton-is-a-similar-politician-to-obama-not-like-her-husband/>*

“Meet the Press host Chuck Todd says that Hillary Clinton’s political style
is close to that of President Obama and unlike that of her Husband, former
president Bill Clinton.”

*National Journal: “Many Iowa Democratic Leaders Want Contested Caucuses”
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline/latest-edition/many-iowa-democratic-leaders-want-contested-caucuses-20150105>*

“‘Iowa Democratic leaders say they are troubled by the prospect that’
former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) ‘could win the state's 2016
presidential caucuses without a serious challenge, a view primarily rooted
in a desire for a more liberal candidate or at least a robust debate about
the party's policies and direction…”

*Articles:*

*Washington Post: Where is the white Southern Republican Bill Clinton on
race?
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/01/05/where-is-the-white-southern-republican-bill-clinton-on-race/>*

By Jonathan Capehart
January 5, 2014

While touring the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock,
you are encouraged to watch a 12-minute film about the life and tenure of
the 42nd president of the United States. I watched it last November while
there for the 10th anniversary of the library’s opening, and I found one
section on race to be particularly powerful. Clinton talked about his
grandfather’s Hope, Ark., store and the role it played in his racial views
throughout his campaigns and his presidency.

Growing up in Arkansas in the ’50s and ’60s shaped my later political views
in several ways. First of all, when I was a little boy hanging out in my
grandfather’s store, I became aware of his commitment to treating everyone
the same whether they had money or not and whatever their race was. I was
only 10 years old when I realized not everyone shared those ideals. When
the Little Rock Central High School crisis broke, every person in Arkansas
had to take sides.

I was home in Arkansas, in Hot Springs, listening as Martin Luther King
told us of his dream that one day children of former slaves and the
children of former slave owners would sit down together at the table of
brotherhood. That speech remains the greatest political speech of my
lifetime — the clearest clarion call to the more perfect union of America
in the 21st century. After I heard it, my commitment to civil rights and
equal opportunity for all Americans was deeper than it had ever been and
stayed with me for a lifetime.

As I sat in that theater where his words and images collided, it occurred
to me that I could not recall a white Southern Republican of presidential
prominence — of any prominence, really — speak as candidly about race, the
dark days of segregation and the effect it had on his or her conscience and
political consciousness.

Perhaps it is because of a reliance on the distasteful but politically
successful “Southern strategy” devised in the late 1960s. Even though
then-Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman called GOP reliance
on the exploitation of white fear and resentment “wrong” in 2005, the
impact of that strategy still reverberates today.

Many thought — and I hoped — Haley Barbour would be that person. When the
highly regarded former Mississippi governor and former GOP chairman was
considering a run for the 2012 presidential nomination, The Post’s Karen
Tumulty reported then that Barbour was also “considering giving a major
speech on” race. Given his blind spot the size of the Confederate flag when
it comes to race, what Barbour might have said on the subject would have
been fascinating. So potent and dangerous was the issue of race that a
longtime friend of Barbour’s told Jason Zengerle in a profile for GQ
magazine in 2011, “If he hasn’t figured out how you overcome it, or pretty
well minimize it, in my opinion he won’t run.” Barbour opted not to run,
and with that, the necessity of his speech on race disappeared.

There have been opportunities for a white Southern Republican to address
race from their perspective. Seven months after Barbour bowed out,
then-presidential candidate and Texas Gov. Rick Perry came face-to-face
with his “Niggerhead” past. Perry weathered the storm by calling the name
associated with his family’s rented ranch “very offensive.” But the episode
dredged up other racially problematic instances in Perry’s past. Last
month’s revelation andadmission that House Majority Whip Steve Scalise
spoke in 2002 to a white supremacist group founded by David Duke is yet
another embarrassing episode for a party that knows it must reach out to
people of color.

The impending crop of 2016 Republican presidential aspirants doesn’t
inspire hope that a white Southern Republican will engage in the race talk
I’m looking for. For instance, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, right now
considered the front-runner, is the scion of a political family that rose
from rarified air in New England, not the bubbling race cauldron of the
South.

Now, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who ditched his Fox News
television show Saturday night to consider another White House run, has
come close to what I’m looking for. This is despite his brief slide into
birtherism in 2011. In his 2008 convention speech for then-nominee Sen.
John McCain (Ariz.), Huckabee said, “I grew up at a time and in a place
where the civil rights movement was fought. I witnessed firsthand the
shameful evil of racism. I saw how ignorance and prejudice caused people to
do the unthinkable to people of color not so many years ago.” But his words
have the feel of a pitying passive observer rather than someone galvanized
to action as his fellow Arkansan, Clinton, was.

What I’m looking for is probably impossible. The questions I asked when
Barbour withdrew from the 2012 presidential race still remain. Is there a
white Southern Republican willing and able to articulate the fear,
frustration and anger filling the racial divide with as much nuance and
eloquence as Barack Obama did in his first run for the Democratic
nomination in 2008? Is there a white Southern Republican willing and able
to give an honest speech on race from his or her perspective that sought to
explain, heal and move the party forward?

No doubt, such a speech would be filled with uncomfortable and painful
memories that would scratch at the fiber of our country. And I recognize it
 could be the undoing of the brave person willing to deliver it. But said
person would help the Republican Party and the nation take a bold step in
breaking “America’s constant curse.”

*Poughkeepsie Journal: Allida Black: “Highlights Clinton's accomplishments”
<http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/opinion/2014/12/31/letters-editor/21125675/>*

By Allida Black

January 2, 2015, 12:12 p.m. EST

No two women have played a more pivotal role in expanding human rights
across the globe than Eleanor Roosevelt and Hillary Clinton. I wrote about
Eleanor Roosevelt's work in an opinion editorial in December. Now, I'd like
to highlight Hillary Clinton's role.

The world knows about Hillary's bold pronouncement in 1995 in Beijing that
"women's rights are human rights, and human rights are women's rights." But
there have been so many other examples.

From elevating women's rights and the Office of Global Women's Issues to
negotiating the release of the blind Chinese human rights activist Chen
Guangcheng in the midst of our nation's most intense economic negotiations
with China, Hillary has, as she wrote in Hard Choices, remained "clear eyed
about the world as it is while never losing sight of the world as we want
it to be."

In 2011, following the death of Ugandan gay rights activist David Kato,
rather than just mourn his death issue a formal rebuke, Hillary decided to
take the world stage and confront the issue head on. Speaking before the
United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, Hillary said, "Like being a
woman, like being a racial, religious, tribal, or ethnic minority, being
LGBT does not make you less human. And that is why gay rights are human
rights, and human rights are gay rights."

Let us hear Hillary's call to "never rest on [our] laurels. Never quit.
Never stop working to make the world a better place. That's our unfinished
business."

*Huffington Post opinion: Peter D. Rosenstein: “Americans will sleep better
when Hillary Rodham Clinton is in the White House”
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-d-rosenstein/americans-will-sleep-bett_b_6417236.html>*

By Peter D. Rosenstein

January 5, 2015, 11:36 a.m. EST

Just think about this report in an AP column by Jill Colvin in the
Huffington Post. "It's after 9 p.m. on a Sunday night in late November and
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is deep into a conference call, talking
about nuclear weapons and Iran. One voice is advocating a hard line,
arguing against allowing Iran any capability to enrich uranium. Another
summarizes the status of current negotiations and argues that forcing Iran
to give up enrichment entirely isn't realistic." "Late at night, away from
the spotlight of the midterm elections and 2016 speculation, he's been on
the phone with some of the brightest foreign policy minds in the Republican
Party, getting ready to run for president." So Christie who knows nothing
about the world situation is now preparing as he would for a college debate
or a final exam. Definitely not a report to inspire confidence in the
electorate he could lead the only superpower left in the world.

But none of the other potential Republican choices would make anyone feel
safer with their finger on the nuclear button. There is former Texas
Governor Rick Perry, the candidate for those who thought George W. Bush was
too cerebral; Jeb Bush, yes he could call his brother George for advice but
remember where that go us; Rick Santorum, enough said; Marco Rubio who
believes the last 50 years of sanctions against Cuba accomplished something
and should be continued; Rand Paul who would call his father for advice and
just turn away from the rest of the world; or Carly Fiorina making her own
noise about running. This being the same Fiorina who got dumped by
Hewett-Packard (HP) because she couldn't get along with her board after
firing 18,000 employees. Her claim to fame was walking away with a golden
parachute worth $21 million (a company saves a lot when you fire 18,000
people). She ran and lost a California Senate race to Barbara Boxer which
came as no surprise since voters are pretty smart and she ran on her expert
business acumen and how she could create jobs.

We live in a world in which a new crisis arises every day and our President
is required to respond. We are bringing to a close America's longest war
but will still have 13,000 American troops in Afghanistan; ISIS is
threatening to overrun Iraq and pull us back to fight there; and Putin is
still flexing his muscles even though they are weaker since the price of
oil plummeted to $50 a gallon. The Israeli/Palestinian situation is always
on the verge of erupting into war and North Korea continues to threaten
havoc. There are hotspots around the globe ready to explode at any time.

Americans must ask themselves are we going to elect a President with no
real foreign affairs knowledge or experience or are we going to elect the
most qualified person ever to run for the office. Are we going to elect
someone who is studying up for a debate or will we elect Hillary Rodham
Clinton who has the world's leaders on speed-dial because she has traveled
the world as Secretary of State negotiating with them and earning their
respect?

They know and we know what she stands for. We can be confident that as
President she understands and won't back away from the challenges the
United States faces. Hillary understands as the only remaining superpower
we can't allow the new isolationists in our country to keep the United
States from acting to protect our homeland and make this a safer world. She
has defined what she means by acting when she describes her view of "Smart
Power." She makes clear it is not always rushing in with troops rather
using all the levers a President has at her disposal with military action
being the last resort. Americans will always sleep better knowing we have a
President with an in-depth understanding of the world situation and the
players in it.

Barack Obama brought the country out of the worst recession we have seen
since the Great Depression. His administration has overseen the creation of
more net jobs than the administrations' of both Bushes together and seen
the unemployment rate go down from over ten percent to less than six
percent. He saved the automotive industry and for the first time in decades
we are seeing a rise in manufacturing jobs.

But the work of rebuilding our economy is far from over and it won't be
accomplished until people once again have the chance to enter the middle
class and see a better future for their families and their children's
children. While we are moving in that direction Hillary Rodham Clinton has
a record that shows she understands what still has to be done. She will
lead a government working to ensure equality for all and providing every
person with the tools they need to succeed.

Americans and peace loving people across the globe will all sleep better if
Hillary Rodham Clinton takes the oath of office on January 20, 2017.

*Wall Street Journal: “Clintons to Attend Mario Cuomo Funeral”
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-christie-to-attend-mario-cuomo-wake-1420478396>*

By Erica Orden

January 5, 2015, 1:11 p.m. EST

[Subtitle:] Biden, Christie Among Those At Wake as Last Respects Paid to
Liberal Champion

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
are set to attend the funeral of former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo on Tuesday,
according to spokesmen, while Vice President Joe Biden and New Jersey Gov.
Chris Christie are among political dignitaries expected to join friends and
family Monday at the wake.

During his presidency, Mr. Clinton considered Mr. Cuomo as a Supreme Court
nominee, but Mr. Cuomo said he wasn’t interested.

Mr. Cuomo, the father of current New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, died Thursday at
age 82, in his home in Manhattan, after suffering from a heart condition
for many months.

He will be mourned at a wake at the Frank E. Campbell Funeral Home from 1
p.m. to 10 p.m.

Mario Cuomo served three terms as governor, rising to prominence with
soaring speeches that defended liberalism during the ascendance of
President Ronald Reagan’s conservatism in the 1980s. He considered running
for president in 1991, drawing national attention for months, but
ultimately declined.

On Saturday, his son Andrew spoke for the first time publicly about his
father’s death, saying “there is a hole in my heart that I fear is going to
be there forever.”

“We’re going to have his wake and his funeral, but I can say I miss him
already,” the governor said, speaking outside a wake being held for New
York City police Officer Wenjian Liu, who along with a fellow police
officer was fatally shot on Dec. 20.

Mr. Cuomo’s Catholic funeral Mass is scheduled for Tuesday at 11 a.m., at
St. Ignatius Loyola Church, on the Upper East Side.

*New York Daily News: “Bill and Hillary Clinton to attend former Gov. Mario
Cuomo's funeral Tuesday”
<http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/bill-hillary-clinton-attend-mario-cuomo-funeral-blog-entry-1.2066298>*

By Annie Karni and Celeste Katz

January 5, 2015, 1:12 p.m. EST

Former President Bill Clinton and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
will join mourners at Tuesday's funeral service for liberal lion Mario
Cuomo.

The former three-term governor, 82, passed away last Thursday afternoon of
heart failure.

"Mario’s life was the very embodiment of the American dream," the Clintons
said in a joint statement after Cuomo's death.

The Clintons and Cuomos have longstanding political and personal bonds.

"When he placed my name in nomination at the 1992 Democratic Convention, he
said government had 'the solemn obligation to create opportunity for all
our people,'" the Clintons' statement on Cuomo's demise continued. "In his
three terms as governor of New York, he honored that obligation.”

The list of speakers at the elder Cuomo's funeral has not yet been
established, according to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's office.

Cuomo's funeral service will be held at 11 a.m. Tuesday at St. Ignatius
Loyola Church on Park Avenue in Manhattan.

Vice President Biden and his wife, Jill, are among those attending Cuomo's
wake Monday at the Frank E. Campbell Funeral Home.

Viewing hours are from 1 to 5 p.m. and from 7 to 10 p.m.

*U.S. News & World Report: “A Resolution for the Contenders”
<http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/charles-wheelan/2015/01/05/hillary-clinton-and-jeb-bush-should-run-like-theyre-not-afraid-to-lose>*

By Charles Wheelan

January 5, 2014, 12:00 p.m. EST

[Subtitle:] The only thing Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton should fear is
running a lousy campaign.

Now is a good time for New Year’s resolutions. Even if most of us fail to
live up to our January goals, there is value in our aspirations. (I plan to
finish a book manuscript, lose five pounds and spend more time practicing
my putting.)

More interesting, here is my resolution for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush
and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: Run for president, and do it
like you are not afraid to lose. This is the political equivalent of
dancing like no one is watching. People who are afraid to lose don’t often
win – not in sports, not in business, not even in the arts. Fear of losing
precludes the risks that typically define major success. If you set out to
make a film that will not lose money at the box office, you will end up
with “Horrible Bosses 2,” not “Citizen Kane.”

Both Bush and Clinton have a lot in common with Mitt Romney, in a good way.
They are smart, thoughtful, experienced, politically savvy and altruistic.
But if they run the kind of campaigns that Romney ran in 2008 and 2012,
both risk losing in the same insipid, humiliating way. More important,
neither would win a mandate to govern America the way we need right now.

So what does a “run like you’re not afraid to lose” campaign look like?

Step One: Survey your life and take account of how good your things would
be if you were not elected president in 2016: children, grandchildren,
travel, myriad opportunities to make money and do good – all without
serious media intrusion.

Step Two: Plan your 2016 campaign recognizing that everything I’ve
described above is the good stuff that happens if you lose. And it’s
really, really good. You shouldn't fear running a good campaign and losing.
The worst-case scenario is running a lousy campaign – pandering to interest
groups, saying stupid things in the primaries, dodging important questions
– and still losing. Don’t pull a Romney. Instead, say things that will
change your respective parties and improve our national discourse. Talk
about issues in ways that would make it easier to govern if you were to
win. Don’t tell us that we can lose weight by eating ice cream. Tell us
that we can lose weight by exercising more and eating less. Then, should
you find yourself in the Oval Office, we will not be shocked when your
weight reduction bill includes things that make us sweat.

Voters say they like to hear hard truths like that, but we don’t. We’re
suckers for people with good hair who tell us that tax cuts will generate
higher government revenues, or that universal health care will pay for
itself through new savings, or that climate change isn’t really a problem,
or that some international crisis (Syria, Afghanistan or the
Israel-Palestine conflict) could be solved if only President Barack Obama
were not so feckless/incompetent/political. None of these things is true.
Some are Republican shibboleths; some are Democratic ones. If you listen to
political talking heads long enough, you’ll hear all of them. Each one is
like telling people they can lose weight by eating ice cream. Not only is
it bogus, but it renders the real solutions less attractive and therefore
less likely to happen.

Instead, tell us that climate change is a real threat and that raising the
cost of carbon-emitting fuels is the only sensible way to deal with that
threat. Tell us that the U.S. is on an unsustainable fiscal path and that
any economically and politically viable fix will require both significant
changes to our entitlement programs and new revenues. Tell us that you’re
not sure what to do in Syria but that you understand the scale of the human
crisis and the dangers that such instability poses to the U.S. (Okay, maybe
it’s not Syria, but just tell us that you’re not sure about something.
Anything.)

Remind yourself that primary voters – the die-hard Democrats and
Republicans that your consultants and fundraisers are now telling you how
to reach – are not only unrepresentative of America but fundamentally out
of sync with everything that has to be done should you reach the White
House. If the party stalwarts cheer excitedly for something in Iowa or New
Hampshire, there is a darn good chance Congress will never pass it.

Typical candidates say and do whatever it takes to win the primaries. Then
they do the same thing in the general election. Finally, having made all
the requisite fibs and promises, they try to govern (while still looking
over their shoulder at the primary voters who will be important for
re-election).

Jeb and Hillary: You are starting from a strong enough position that you
have the potential to turn the whole campaign process on its head. First,
identify what you would like to do as president. What really has to happen?
What accomplishments would justify taking on this horrible job? Then use
the campaign to build a coalition to support those changes. If you win, you
will have a mandate to change America’s trajectory for the better. If you
lose, see No. 1 above. Tell yourself: Gosh darn it, I’m going to be a
transformative leader or lose trying.

Is this naive? Of course it is. That’s the point of New Year’s resolutions.
(When I belonged to a health club in Chicago, I was always relieved in
early February when the parking lot was no longer crowded.)

Still, I’m reminded of the late Paul Tsongas, the former Massachusetts
senator who made a quixotic bid for president in 1992. I covered his
campaign as a young journalist. At one point, I asked Tsongas if he really
thought he could win. He replied, “I don’t have to win. I just have to run
a race that my grandchildren will be proud of.”

It’s a great answer, even for candidates who have a very good chance of
winning.

*Associated Press: “A Year Before 2016, Iowa Full of Presidential Hopefuls”
<http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_2016_IOWA_MOVES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>*

By Thomas Beaumont

January 5, 2015, 12:36 p.m. EST

ALTOONA, Iowa (AP) -- Soft laughter rippled through the audience in an Iowa
church meeting room when a woman punctuated her question to the keynote
speaker, Bernie Sanders, with, "when you're president."

The reaction was a gentle acknowledgment that the Vermont senator, whose
self-described socialist positions appeal to the hardest-core liberals, is
a long shot for the Oval Office.

Yet while Democrats and Republicans are waiting for Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Jeb Bush and other major prospects to formally kick off the 2016 race in
the state with the first presidential caucuses, other lesser known or more
unlikely aspirants are already active in Iowa, letting everyone know
they're available.

They're following a long-established ritual, based on the notion that even
far-fetched dreams can come true in a place where friendly people will come
out to hear candidates and the media is ever alert for political tremors.

Along with Sanders, former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb and Maryland Gov. Martin
O'Malley among Democrats, and neurosurgeon Ben Carson, a Republican, are
among the non-short-listers making contacts in the state, giving speeches
and road-testing their messages.

Most don't actually say they're running. They're just saying hello.

"I don't know if it's an advantage as much as it is laying down a marker,
starting to bend the arc of the conversation," said Sue Dvorsky, former
Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman.

And this being campaign-steeped Iowa, most seem to draw an audience.

On a two-day mid-December trip, Sanders, who is among the Senate's most
liberal members, made a series of stops in which he touted expanding
government regulation of banking, universal government-funded health care
and a $15-per-hour minimum wage. Sanders is one of only two senators who
don't identify as Democrat or Republican, though he caucuses and votes with
Senate Democrats.

Sanders, hunched over a hotel ballroom podium with his tussled shock of
white hair, declared that it's time to break up the nation's big banks.

"If Teddy Roosevelt were alive today, he would say, and we should say, if
these guys are too big to fail, they are too big to exist," Sanders said.

Sanders' populist pitch bears some resemblance to that of Massachusetts
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the rising star of the Democratic left. But she has
said she won't run for president, leaving room for Sanders to hope.

Ron Rosenblatt, a financial services company owner, cheered Sanders along
with about 150 invited Democrats in the Altoona hotel ballroom. "I like his
ability to generate enthusiasm," he said, but at 73, "he's at an age that
would make it difficult."

O'Malley, known for defending gay marriage and repealing the death penalty,
visited Iowa four times last year and contributed more than $45,000 to Iowa
candidates and party organizations, which made him friends in convenient
places. Governors often make good presidential candidates, and O'Malley,
51, would be one of the few in the Democratic field, fitting somewhere to
Clinton's left on the political spectrum.

Webb, a former secretary of the Navy, visited in September before
announcing his plans to explore a candidacy in November. He would slot to
Clinton's right.

Clinton visited Iowa twice in 2014 to campaign for Iowa Democrats, but has
sent few public signals about her plans, even though most expect her to run.

Although national polls 13 months before the Iowa caucuses reflect mostly
name familiarity, about 60 percent of likely Democratic primary voters say
they would vote for Clinton. Sanders, O'Malley and Webb combine for less
than 10 percent.

Long shot Republicans have also been busy in Iowa, along with the better
known names such as New Jersey's Chris Christie and 2012 Iowa caucuses
winner Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator. Louisiana Gov. Bobby
Jindal has stepped up his Iowa travel, as has former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

Newcomer Carson, 63, a retired Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon who was raised in
inner city Detroit, has impressed crowds of curious Republicans on his two
trips. Carson, who is African American, ignited curiosity among
conservatives after he criticized political correctness, the federal debt
and the health care overhaul during the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast,
with President Barack Obama in attendance.

While Carson isn't well known, other little candidates wound up eventually
getting attention here in 2008, such as businessman Herman Cain, before
eventually falling.

Providing hope to all longshots are Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas
governor, who won the 2008 Republican caucuses, and former Vermont Gov.
Howard Dean, who came from nowhere in 2004 to challenge eventual Democratic
nominee John Kerry.

But for every Huckabee, said former GOP chairman Matt Strawn, "There is a
Tommy Thompson, Tom Tancredo or Chris Dodd," referring to Iowa competitors
who never broke through.

Physician Christi Taylor of Waukee, who heard one of Carson's talks, said
she was "blown away" by his remarks about personal responsibility.

Now she's part of an effort to draft Carson to run. "As someone who likes
to evaluate facts, I want to pick the right person, not who has the biggest
name in lights," Taylor said.

*CNN: “Why U.S. needs to stay in Afghanistan”
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/05/opinion/bergen-keep-troops-in-afghanistan/index.html>*

By Peter Bergen

January 5, 2015, 8:04 a.m. EST

President Barack Obama says that the last American troops will leave
Afghanistan at the end of 2016. This happens to roughly coincide with the
end of his second term in office and also fulfills his campaign promise to
wind down America's post-9/11 wars.

But is it a wise policy?

Short answer: Of course not.

One only has to look at the debacle that has unfolded in Iraq after the
withdrawal of US troops at the end of 2011 to have a sneak preview of what
could take place in an Afghanistan without some kind of residual American
presence. Without U.S. forces in the country, there is a strong possibility
Afghanistan could host a reinvigorated Taliban allied to a reinvigorated al
Qaeda.

Needless to say, this would be a disaster for Afghanistan. But it would
also be quite damaging to U.S. interests to have some kind of resurgent al
Qaeda in the country where the group trained the hijackers for the 9/11
attacks.

It would also be disastrous for the Democratic Party, should it win the
presidency in 2016, to be the party that "lost" Afghanistan. After all, the
Democratic Party is viewed by some as weaker on national security than the
Republicans and it is inevitable that without some kind of residual
American presence in Afghanistan al Qaeda would gain sufficient strength to
launch an attack from the Afghan-Pakistan border region against American
interests.

An easy way for potential Democratic Party presidential candidates such as
Hillary Clinton to distinguish their national security policies from
Obama's would be to say that they are in favor of some kind of long-term
U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and to argue that it would be needed
to avoid an Iraq-style outcome there.

Similarly, as the Republican Party starts ramping up for the 2016 campaign,
potential candidates such as Jeb Bush can distinguish themselves from the
isolationist Rand Paul wing of the party by saying that they are committed
to a long-term presence in Afghanistan.

This U.S. military presence in Afghanistan doesn't have to be a large, nor
does it need to play a combat role, but U.S. troops should remain in
Afghanistan to advise the Afghan army and provide intelligence support.

Such a long-term commitment of several thousand American troops is exactly
the kind of force that the Obama administration was forced to deploy to
Iraq during the past six months following ISIS's lightning advances.

Selling such a long-term U.S. military presence in Afghanistan would be
pushing against an open door with that nation's government. Consider that
within 24 hours of being installed, the new Afghan government signed the
basing agreement that allows American troops to stay in Afghanistan until
December 2016.

Consider also that the Afghan government has already negotiated a strategic
partnership agreement with the United States lasting until 2024 that would
provide the framework for a longer term U.S. military presence. Consider
also that many Afghans see a relatively small, but long-term international
troop presence as a guarantor of their stability.

It is also not in Pakistan's interests for Afghanistan to fall to the
Taliban or be thrust into another civil war. The Pakistanis have seen for
themselves repeatedly the folly of allowing the Taliban to flourish on
their own soil, most recently in the Taliban attack last month on the army
school in Peshawar that killed 132 children.

It is in Pakistan's own interest that the Afghan army is able to fight
effectively against the Taliban, which is more likely if they continue to
have American advisers at their side.

Other regional powers such as the Chinese worry about Chinese Uighur
separatists establishing themselves on Afghan soil.The Russians are
similarly worried about Islamist terrorist groups located in Afghanistan
and so will not stand in the way of a small long-term U.S. military
presence in Afghanistan as that would dovetail with their own security
concerns about the country.

Keeping a relatively small, predominantly U.S. Special Forces, presence in
Afghanistan to continue to train the Afghan army past December 2016 is a
wise policy that would benefit both Afghans and Americans.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties should adopt such a plan in
their platforms as they gear up for the 2016 campaign.

*Washington Free Beacon: “Chuck Todd: Hillary Clinton Is a Similar
Politician to Obama, Not Like Her Husband”
<http://freebeacon.com/politics/chuck-todd-hillary-clinton-is-a-similar-politician-to-obama-not-like-her-husband/>*

[No Writer Mentioned]

January 5, 2015, 8:54 a.m. EST

Meet the Press host Chuck Todd says that Hillary Clinton’s political style
is close to that of President Obama and unlike that of her Husband, former
president Bill Clinton.

When asked about Hillary Clinton’s relationship with Obama, Todd said, “I
think a lot better than people realize. I have the impression that they are
more alike as politicians than for instance hillary and bill are.”

Promoting his new book on C-SPAN’s Book TV, Todd said unlike former
Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton and Obama both
weren’t born with political instincts.

Hillary and Obama “both have come to politics on the campaign side of it,
the theatric side of it,” Todd said. “They’ve both had to learn it–it’s not
instinctual to them.”

Todd’s analysis fits with the belief that Hillary Clinton would essentially
be a third Obama term to keep his policies intact.

*National Journal: “Many Iowa Democratic Leaders Want Contested Caucuses”
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline/latest-edition/many-iowa-democratic-leaders-want-contested-caucuses-20150105>*

By Adam Wollner

January 5, 2015

"Iowa Democratic leaders say they are troubled by the prospect that" former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) "could win the state's 2016
presidential caucuses without a serious challenge, a view primarily rooted
in a desire for a more liberal candidate or at least a robust debate about
the party's policies and direction ... Many county officials said they
would like to see" Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sen. Bernie Sanders
(I-VT) run. "State Democratic officials also want a contested race because
that boosts the party apparatus and fundraising." (*Wall Street Journal*
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/top-iowa-democrats-slow-to-rally-around-hillary-clinton-1420418121?cb=logged0.42685506539419293>
)