I myself think she was trying to hide it as long as she could -
Posted By: Amanda on 2008-12-19
In Reply to: so............. sm - m
the night she was first brought out, her daughter held the other baby in front of her all the time with an old blanket draped across her front. At the time, I kept wondering, why she would do that, and now I believe she was trying to hide her stomach from view that night.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
People with nothing to hide, hide nothing!
One of my favorite quotes!
You'll be waiting a long, long time, then, cuz she's going to do
He died a long, long time ago! (If he was ever
Don't force your beliefs on others. It further devalues your faith in the eyes of others.
Why is it sad? What do you have to hide? nm
I don't have anything to hide, do you?
I could care less if the government opens my mail (which they have been doing for years and long before 9/11 BTW), my emails or listens to my phone conversations. I have nothing to hide. You also are not allowed to send contraband in the mail. It's a federal offense and always has been. If one were speaking to terrorists and live in this country one should be brought up on charges of aiding and abetting the enemy and for being a traitor to this country.
I have nothing to hide. If this is
actually going on, they would quickly realize that I'm no threat. The worst they could get me for is gossiping.
No need to run and hide from
What I heard Obama reiterate his consistent policy to Joe the unlicensed. In the absence of a link, not too sure I heard that "below Joe" phrase from Obama, but I am assuming you are referring to income levels. Apparently, you did not hear me say that progressive tax structure has been in place for as long as I can remember and that giving tax cuts and tax credits, allowing tax cuts to expire, adjusting tax rate, adding and subtracting deductions, opening and closing loopholes revising categories of tax burden to be benefit or detriement of any given class (i.e, shrubs's tax cuts to the rich that redistributed tax burden "downward" onto the middle class) is nothing new under the sun and is actually very, very American.
You obviously do not understand (or at least, have a selective understanding of) socialism. Palin's "collective ownership of resources" skips that bump in the road all together and smack of communism...straight up, as does government ownership of banks and lending institutions along with government buy-outs of privately owned properties such as homes, as proposed by McCain. If Obama is a socialist, so is McCain, so is Palin and so is the shrub....unless of course, you would have us believe that as long as the bucks are directed upward to a ruling elite class (as was the case in the Soviet Union) and left to trickle down across the land does not qualify as redistribution of wealth.
Get over yourself. Palin and McCain have busted their own slur campaign just by opening their mouths. It does not matter to me whether or not you understand basic economics...what matters to me is how this folly is playing out on the campaign trail with the undecided and independent voters.
I think if they had tried to hide it...(sm)
it would have been 10 times worse. -- that would also be true if we were talking about dems in that position. Having said that, since Palin advocates abstinence and safe sex (as do the dems), the position her daughter is in only proves that this approach does not always work. I don't fault Palin or her daughter for the pregnancy, but I do fault the republican party for putting her up there as an example. It just sends a mixed message. I just think it was a bad choice.
NY'ers would never run and hide
I am a born and bred New Yorker and you bet we would stand and fight. New Yorkers are quite a tough bunch. You must never have met a New Yorker cause you would not question whether they would stand and fight. And if you are a Brooklynite, LOL, you are even tougher.
The only one who would worry about it is the one who has something to hide. sm
I could care less. I won't answer in this thread anymore.
Run and hide from this can of worms
You think you can dismiss W administration boondoggle on this by pointing a finger at 2 people? Cooked books do not even qualify as the tip of the iceberg on this issue. I will not be going to chat rooms and biased resources to analyze this one. It is HUGE and frightening in terms of just how close the country is to total economic collapse. Whether you realize it or not, this crisis has global consequences in overseas markets. We will not be the only ones mopping up and ultimately a global solution will need to come into play.
In any case, this subject deserves more than just a casual flippant dismissal, is quite complicated and requires objective and in-depth analysis before concluding who is responsible and, more importantly, what can be done in terms of policy and legislation to prevent it from happening in the future. Most definitively, of paramount importance will be the "R" word that sends chills down the spine of W's flock…regulation of the mortgage/banking lending practices. W is positively allergic to that idea, and McCain's policy on that is exactly what now? At least Obama had already addressed this issue in his platform and is currently making an effort to "study" the situation further before issuing any further statement on it. I appreciate that in a leader, especially when it comes to a crisis of such magnitude.
Your Enron analogy is delusional. Enjoy while you can and just wait for the real underlying issues to reach the light of day. Like I said before, this feminist flap is a featherweight distraction from critical problems our nation is facing, but then again, I would expect nothing less from the JM/SP camp.
He can't hide the fact
that he cheated on his first wife many times before he met Cindy McCain and left his wife for her. I also have a good friend who as a former fighter pilot actually knew John McCain. He saw the philandering first-hand and has a very low opinion of him. And he is a conservative republican.
Probably because you hide behind your anonymous
daily moniker. You won't tell anyone what you do, who you are, or what your husband does.
The previous poster did, and I applaud her and her husband for all their hard work and dedication, and community involvement.
Sounds like someone I'd like to call a friend.
I have nothing to hide either - but don't want them listening to me - nm
x
How do you know Obama has nothing to hide? sm
I get no real pleasure with my gut feelings on this man. He was a complete unknown except for his past associations which he completely denied and threw to the curb when needed. It is a fact that he has put under lock and key, important documents that reveal his character. What you have seen play out in the media, is what they want you to see.
Everyone has a past. Hopefully, Obama can rise above it and prove himself to be an honorable leader. But some of his choices show his lack of character, and only time will tell who the real man is, who will become our next president shortly.
O will fold and hide
behind Michelle's ample skirt. He has neither the experience or the guts to do what is needed. We will be run into the ground under and trampled over under O.
Yep, she could not hide her bias.
nm
Hide and watch. Isn't that what our very own
do, hide and watch right before they pull the trigger like they did with Dr. Tiller in a church no less? When it is Obama that is their next victim that they have been **hiding and watching**, I can't wait to see the explanations for that from the hiders and watchers on this very own board.
Limberger lies and tries to hide it, LOL
Biggest bunch of bunk? Limberger stated terrible things about Sheehan, ranting and raving. Then when he is called on it, he has it disappear from his website and states he never said any of it. Yet, the proof is in the pudding. Limberger is a liar, as are quite a few of the prominent radical right wing neocons, including the warmonger chickenhawk in the WH. The proof is there, the words were spoken by the druggie. So there is no reason to get all huffy and puffy, you have nothing to defend. Thank goodness for the written word and videos. Limberger..phew, he stinks.
Party all you want. Then go hide your money from
nm
Oooooo...let's all hide under the bed till he's gone! (nm)
You right-wingers are some wacky folks! I can't help but laugh at some of your posts.
Yes, any money you have left, hide it!. Otherwise,
nm
be grateful you have money to hide
so stingy and hateful
No instead they hide behind woman and children
In their own country. Not in boats.
I wish the people reporting this on the news would not be so iggy.
This is a lie. They live in Gaza. They don't hide there.
They were democratically elected into power, defeating the Fatah party, which retains its majority in the West Bank, but Hamas has won elections there, too.
The majority of the people in Gaza live in the squalor of refugee camps under the iron fist of their hostile occupiers who imposed an apartheid police state and enforce blockades of basic supplies such as food, medicine and MONEY. This strangles their economy and starves their people. Israel was supposed to lift the blockade as part of the cease fire conditions. They have had since June to do this and by the time the cease fire expired on December 19th, they had not done so and had no intention of doing so. THAT is why the cease fire did not hold. Surprise, surprise. More lies and broken promises from Israel, only these particular lies are creating deadly and fatal conditions for the entire population in Gaza. Can you say genocide? It's a war of attrition at the hands of Israel and sanctioned by the United States.
They do not hide behind women and children. The population in Gaza supports the resistance to the blockade, since they and their children are the ones who are being slowly starved to death. That's why they elected Hamas. An occupied population which has been invaded repeatedly, blockaded, has the highest unemployment rate in the world (Gaza at 45%), has no medical supplies and is on the verge of starvation tend to arm themselves and band together against their common enemy. It's human nature to do so. This is not about anything more than simple survival for them.
Actually, I was TRYING to hide from Rush; impossible because...sm
like a very bad itchy rash, or the smell of cow manure, he is EVERYWHERE, even to ignorant dems/independents who (OH MY GOD) get all the nes channels, C-SPAN, that the special Republicans can. You know, it is ironic that Rush could be a lying, hypocritical pill-popper addict AND still be the messiah of the Republican Right. Were he a Dem or Independent, there is NO WAY that stuff would have EVER been forgotten/forgiven, no way. Just because we are not listening to the rantings of a hypocritical, press-hunting, pompous, loud, obnoxious BS'er like Rush does not mean we "don't get the real news"....on the contrary, I think it shows we do, and we can read between the lines and interpret with intelligence. JMHO, putting on my flame-retardant suit.
And that's NO JOKE! Hide and watch! Exactly what
--
If it's high you flash it, if it's low you hide it.....sm
like everything else, isn't it?
You hide BEHIND race...that is your obsession with O
And, yes, admit it, you didn't have a clue about MLK, as many that repeat his words don't know, or they would rethink the Obama thing....
You do NOT know what he stood for, you just repeat stuff he has said and that is all. Do you know how he felt about dems? No, you don't.... how he detested them? no, you don't, do your homework and stop trying to twist things around...
For you and especially the loud mouth ranting earlier, race is THE issue...so why is it you don't mind spewing it out but you just can't take the truth thrown back at ya?! I suspect you should get over it as you put it...
He's real. He is who is he is and he doesn't hide behind fakery. sm
I respect him for that. Harry Truman was not polished either. Neither as Lyndon Johnson. It's just not a big deal right now.
Doesn't hide behind fakery? You are kidding, right?sm
I am surprised lightning has not struck the man for all his lying, never mind all the blood on his hands.
Yeah, trying to hide Obama's answer, which is the
nm
people who hide behind God for bad manners and stupidity irk me
NM
I won't hide! It's kinda hard to give
posts any merit when the writer won't come forward. I don't like getting slammed, but what the heck--guess I deserve it sometimes.
Easy way for racists to hide their truths as well
Sure seems an easy way out to say that "oh! everytime I say something about Obama people say its racism, but it's not!" What a copy out and easy way to try to hide your racism.
You actually dont hide your sins welll either.....
You continuously judge people. How about just pray for them instead. Say that your opinion differs, and you have not felt first hand what they or their families have gone through, but you will pray for them to be okay and be right themselves with God. You don't know their relationship with God, their struggles or anything else, just as we don't know yours. I will pray for you though.
I think Jesse Jackson's probem is that Obama is not trying to hide the problems - see message
He is not trying to hide the problems in the black community - like his speech about father's needing to stand up and become involved in their children's lives - not just "bear the fruit" and leave it to rot... Most black people want their problems kept quiet and they will take care of it themselves. Also if there is a problem in the black community, they want to take care of it themselves and not broadcast it for the world to become aware (like they do not already know). As long as there is not a prominent black figure calling attention to their problems, they don't have to recognize them.
It is the same with Bill Cosby. The black community does not like it that he calls attention through the media to the problems. If he were just working behind the scenes quietly, it would be okay.
Understand, I am not prejudiced against black people - very involved with black people and therefore know some of how they think - agree with some of it and disagree with some of it.
how long
back and forth through my working day about 20 minutes or less.
Very long and quite sad
At least she got to go home to Ireland.
The Sunday Times October 09, 2005
Ireland: I wanted to slap him
George W Bush was so upset by Carole Coleman’s White House interview that an official complaint was lodged with the Irish embassy. The RTE journalist explains why the president made her blood boil
With just minutes to go to my interview with George W Bush, I was escorted to the White House library, where a staff member gave instructions on how to greet the president: “He’ll be coming in the door behind you, just stand up, turn around and extend your hand.”
I placed my notes on the coffee table, someone attached a microphone to my lapel, and I waited. The two chairs by the fireplace where the president and I would sit were at least six feet apart; clearly I would not be getting too close to him.
*
The room was well-lit, providing the kind of warm background conducive to a fireside chat. Several people had crowded in behind me. I counted five members of the White House film crew, there was a stenographer sitting in the corner and three or four security staff. I was still counting them when someone spoke. “He’s coming.”
I stood up, turned around to face the door and seconds later the president strode towards me. Bush appeared shorter than on camera and he looked stern and rather grey that day.
“Thanks for comin’, Mr President” I said, sticking out my hand. I had borrowed this greeting directly from him. When Bush made a speech at a rally or town hall, he always began by saying “Thanks for comin’” in his man-of-the-people manner. If he detected the humour in my greeting, he didn’t let on. He took my hand with a firm grip and, bringing his face right up close to mine, stared me straight in the eyes for several seconds, as though drinking in every detail of my face. He sat down and an aide attached a microphone to his jacket.
Nobody said a word. “We don’t address the president unless he speaks first,” a member of the film crew had told me earlier. The resulting silence seemed odd and discomforting, so I broke it. “How has your day been, Mr President?” Without looking up at me, he continued to straighten his tie and replied in a strong Texan drawl, “Very busy.”
This was followed by an even more disconcerting silence that, compounded by the six feet separating us, made it difficult to establish any rapport.
“Will Mrs Bush be seeing any of our beautiful country?” I tried again, attempting to warm things up by adding that I had heard that the taoiseach would be keeping him too busy for sightseeing on his forthcoming trip to Ireland.
“He’s putting me to work, is he? Have you not interviewed Laura?” “No, I haven’t met your wife.” I suggested that he put in a good word for me. He chuckled. By now he seemed settled and the crew looked ready, but still nobody spoke. I was beginning to worry that the clock may have already started on my 10 minutes.
“Are we all ready to go then?” I asked, looking around the room. The next voice I heard was the president’s. “I think we have a spunky one here,” he said, to nobody in particular.
MC, a White House press officer whom I’ve decided not to identify, had phoned me three days earlier to say that President Bush would do an interview with RTE. “Good news,” she had said. “It goes this Thursday at 4.20pm. You will have 10 minutes with the president and Turkish television will talk to him just before you.”
My initial excitement was dampened only by the timing, much later than I had hoped. The interview would take place just three hours before I was to fly back to Ireland to cover his arrival at the EU summit at Dromoland Castle in Clare and just 15 minutes before the start of RTE’s Prime Time programme on which the interview would be broadcast. It would be practically impossible to have the president on air in time for this.
“That’s fabulous,” I gushed, “but is there any way I could go before the Turks?” I had previously explained about the Prime Time programme, so MC knew the situation. “I’ll look into it,” she offered.
The interview sounded like quite a production. We wouldn’t be able to just saunter in there with a camera. It would be filmed by a White House crew, which would then hand over the tapes to me to be copied and returned the same day.
MC asked me for a list of questions and topics, which she said was required for policy purposes in case I should want to ask something that the president needed to be briefed on. The request did not seem odd to me then. The drill had been exactly the same for an interview I had conducted six months earlier with the then secretary of state, Colin Powell.
“What would you ask the president of the United States?” I enquired of everyone I met in the following days. Ideas had already been scribbled on scattered notepads in my bedroom, on scraps of paper in my handbag and on my desk, but once the date was confirmed, I mined suggestions from my peers in RTE and from foreign policy analysts. I grilled my friends in Washington and even pestered cab drivers. After turning everything over in my head, I settled on a list of 10 questions.
Securing a time swap with Turkish television ensured that I saw the president 10 minutes earlier, but there was still less than half an hour to bring the taped interview to the production place four blocks away in time for Prime Time.
Still, with the arrangements starting to fall into place, the sense of chaos receded and I returned to the questions, which by now were perpetually dancing around my head, even in my sleep. Reporters often begin a big interview by asking a soft question — to let the subject warm up before getting into the substance of the topic at hand. This was how I had initially intended to begin with Bush, but as I mentally rehearsed the likely scenario, I felt that too much time could be consumed by his first probable answer, praising Ireland and looking forward to his visit. We could, I had calculated, be into the third minute before even getting to the controversial topics. I decided to ditch the cordial introduction.The majority of the Irish public, as far as I could tell, was angry with Bush and did not want to hear a cosy fireside chat in the middle of the most disputed war since Vietnam. Instead of the kid-glove start, I would get down to business.
*
On Thursday June 24, Washington DC was bathed in a moist 90-degree heat, the type that makes you perspire all over after you have walked only two blocks. Stephanie and I arrived at the northwest gate of the White House that afternoon, and were directed to the Old Executive Office building, Vice President Dick Cheney’s headquarters, and were introduced to MC, whom I had spoken to only by phone. An elegant and confident woman, she was the cut of CJ, the feisty White House press secretary on The West Wing television drama.
A younger male sidekick named Colby stood close by nodding at everything she said and interjecting with a few comments of his own every now and then. Colby suggested that I ask the president about the yellow suit the taoiseach had worn the previous week at the G8 Summit on Sea Island in Georgia. I laughed loudly and then stopped to study his face for signs that he was joking — but he didn’t appear to be. “The president has a good comment on that,” he said.
The taoiseach’s suit had been a shade of cream, according to the Irish embassy. But alongside the other more conservatively dressed leaders, it had appeared as a bright yellow, leaving our Bertie looking more like the lead singer in a band than the official representative of the European Union. It was amusing at the time, but I was not about to raise a yellow suit with the president. “Really?” I asked politely. But a little red flag went up inside my head.
Then MC announced that she had some news for me. “There may be another interview in the pipeline for you,” she said.
“Me?”
“We’re not supposed to tell you this yet, but we are trying to set up an interview with the first lady.”
She indicated that the White House had already been in contact with RTE to make arrangements for the interview at Dromoland Castle, where the president and Mrs Bush would be staying. As an admirer of Laura Bush’s cool grace and sharp intellect, I had requested interviews with her several times previously without any reply. Now the first lady of the United States was being handed to me on a plate. I could not believe my luck.
“Of course, it’s not certain yet,” MC added. And then her sidekick dropped his second bombshell. “We’ll see how you get on with the president first.”
I’m sure I continued smiling, but I was stunned. What I understood from this was that if I pleased the White House with my questioning of the president, I would get to interview the first lady. Were they trying to ensure a soft ride for the president, or was I the new flavour of the month with the first family?
“I’m going to give the president his final briefing. Are there any further questions you want to pass on to him?” MC asked.
“No,” I said, “just tell him I want to chat.”
Stephanie and I locked eyes and headed for the ladies’ powder room, where we prayed.
Mr President,” I began. “You will arrive in Ireland in less than 24 hours’ time. While our political leaders will welcome you, unfortunately the majority of our people will not. They are annoyed about the war in Iraq and about Abu Ghraib. Are you bothered by what Irish people think?”
The president was reclining in his seat and had a half-smile on his face, a smile I had often seen when he had to deal with something he would rather not.
“Listen. I hope the Irish people understand the great values of our country. And if they think that a few soldiers represent the entirety of America, they don’t really understand America then . . . We are a compassionate country. We’re a strong country, and we’ll defend ourselves. But we help people. And we’ve helped the Irish and we’ll continue to do so. We’ve got a good relationship with Ireland.”
“And they are angry over Iraq as well and particularly the continuing death toll there,” I added, moving him on to the war that had claimed 100 Iraqi lives that very day. He continued to smile, but just barely.
“Well, I can understand that. People don’t like war. But what they should be angry about is the fact that there was a brutal dictator there that had destroyed lives and put them in mass graves and torture rooms . . . Look, Saddam Hussein had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, against the neighbourhood. He was a brutal dictator who posed a threat that the United Nations voted unanimously to say, Mr Saddam Hussein . . .”
Having noted the tone of my questions, the president had now sat forward in his chair and had become animated, gesturing with his hands for emphasis. But as I listened to the history of Saddam Hussein and the weapons inspectors and the UN resolutions, my heart was sinking. He was resorting to the type of meandering stock answer I had heard scores of times and had hoped to avoid. Going back over this old ground could take two or three minutes and allow him to keep talking without dealing with the current state of the war. It was a filibuster of sorts. If I didn’t challenge him, the interview would be a wasted opportunity.
“But, Mr President, you didn’t find any weapons,” I interjected.
“Let me finish, let me finish. May I finish?”
With his hand raised, he requested that I stop speaking. He paused and looked me straight in the eye to make sure I had got the message. He wanted to continue, so I backed off and he went on. “The United Nations said, ‘Disarm or face serious consequences’. That’s what the United Nations said. And guess what? He didn’t disarm. He didn’t disclose his arms. And therefore he faced serious consequences. But we have found a capacity for him to make a weapon. See, he had the capacity to make weapons . . .”
I was now beginning to feel shut out of this event. He had the floor and he wasn’t letting me dance. My blood was boiling to such a point that I felt like slapping him. But I was dealing with the president of the United States; and he was too far away anyway. I suppose I had been naive to think that he was making himself available to me so I could spar with him or plumb the depths of his thought processes. Sitting there, I knew that I was nobody special and that this was just another opportunity for the president to repeat his mantra. He seemed irked to be faced with someone who wasn’t nodding gravely at him as he was speaking.
“But Mr President,” I interrupted again, “the world is a more dangerous place today. I don’t know whether you can see that or not.”
“Why do you say that?”
“There are terrorist bombings every single day. It’s now a daily event. It wasn’t like that two years ago.”
“What was it like on September 11 2001? It was a . . . there was relative calm, we . . .”
“But it’s your response to Iraq that’s considered . . .”
“Let me finish. Let me finish. Please. You ask the questions and I’ll answer them, if you don’t mind.”
His hand was raised again as if to indicate that he was not going to tolerate this. Again, I felt I had no choice but to keep quiet.
“On September 11 2001, we were attacked in an unprovoked fashion. Everybody thought the world was calm. There have been bombings since then — not because of my response to Iraq. There were bombings in Madrid, there were bombings in Istanbul. There were bombings in Bali. There were killings in Pakistan.”
He seemed to be finished, so I took a deep breath and tried once again. So far, facial expressions were defining this interview as much as anything that was said, so I focused on looking as if I was genuinely trying to fathom him.
“Indeed, Mr President, and I think Irish people understand that. But I think there is a feeling that the world has become a more dangerous place because you have taken the focus off Al-Qaeda and diverted into Iraq. Do you not see that the world is a more dangerous place? I saw four of your soldiers lying dead on the television the other day, a picture of four soldiers just lying there without their flak jackets.”
“Listen, nobody cares more about death than I do . . .”
“Is there a point or place . . .”
“Let me finish. Please. Let me finish, and then you can follow up, if you don’t mind.”
By now he was getting used to the rhythm of this interview and didn’t seem quite so taken aback by my attempt to take control of it. “Nobody cares more about death than I do. I care a lot about it. But I do believe the world is a safer place and becoming a safer place. I know that a free Iraq is going to be a necessary part of changing the world.”
The president seemed to be talking more openly now and from the heart rather than from a script. The history lesson on Saddam was over. “Listen, people join terrorist organisations because there’s no hope and there’s no chance to raise their families in a peaceful world where there is not freedom. And so the idea is to promote freedom and at the same time protect our security. And I do believe the world is becoming a better place, absolutely.”
I could not tell how much time had elapsed, maybe five or six minutes, so I moved quickly on to the question I most wanted to ask George Bush in person.
“Mr President, you are a man who has a great faith in God. I’ve heard you say many times that you strive to serve somebody greater than yourself.”
“Right.”
“Do you believe that the hand of God is guiding you in this war on terror?”
This question had been on my mind ever since September 11, when Bush began to invoke God in his speeches. He spoke as if he believed that his job of stewarding America through the attacks and beyond was somehow preordained, that he had been chosen for this role. He closed his eyes as he began to answer.
“Listen, I think that God . . . that my relationship with God is a very personal relationship. And I turn to the Good Lord for strength. I turn to the Good Lord for guidance. I turn to the Good Lord for forgiveness. But the God I know is not one that . . . the God I know is one that promotes peace and freedom. But I get great sustenance from my personal relationship.”
He sat forward again. “That doesn’t make me think I’m a better person than you are, by the way. Because one of the great admonitions in the Good Book is, ‘Don’t try to take a speck out of your eye if I’ve got a log in my own’.”
I suspected that he was also telling me that I should not judge him.
I switched to Ireland again and to the controversy then raging over the Irish government’s decision to allow the use of Shannon Airport for the transport of soldiers and weapons to the Gulf.
“You are going to meet Bertie Ahern when you arrive at Shannon Airport tomorrow. I guess he went out on a limb for you, presumably because of the great friendship between our two countries. Can you look him in the eye when you get there and say, ‘It will be worth it, it will work out’?”
“Absolutely. I wouldn’t be doing this, I wouldn’t have made the decision I did if I didn’t think the world would be better.”
I felt that the President had now become personally involved in this interview, even quoting a Bible passage, so I made one more stab at trying to get inside his head.
“Why is it that others don’t understand what you are about?”
He shrugged. “I don’t know. History will judge what I’m about.”
I could not remember my next question. My mind had gone completely blank. The president had not removed me from his gaze since we had begun and I wanted to keep up the eye contact.
If I diverted to my notes on the table beside me, he would know he had flustered me. For what seemed like an eternity, but probably no more than two seconds, I stared at him, searching his eyes for inspiration. It finally came.
“Can I just turn to the Middle East?”
“Sure.”
He talked about his personal commitment to solving that conflict. As he did so, I could see one of the White House crew signalling for me to wrap up the interview, but the president was in full flight.
“Like Iraq, the Palestinian and the Israeli issue is going to require good security measures,” he said.
Now out of time, I was fully aware that another question was pushing it, but I would never be here again and I had spent four years covering an administration that appeared to favour Israel at every turn.
“And perhaps a bit more even-handedness from America?” I asked, though it came out more as a comment.
The president did not see the look of horror on the faces of his staff as he began to defend his stance. “I’m the first president to have called for a Palestinian state. That to me sounds like a reasonable and balanced approach. I will not allow terrorists determine the fate, as best I can, of people who want to be free.”
Hands were signalling furiously now for me to end the interview.
“Mr President, thank you very much.”
“You’re welcome,” he replied, still half-smiling and half-frowning.
It was over. I felt like a delinquent child who had been reprimanded by a stern, unwavering father. My face must have been the same colour as my suit. Yet I also knew that we had discussed some important issues — probably more candidly than I had heard from President Bush in some time.
I was removing my microphone when he addressed me.
“Is that how you do it in Ireland — interrupting people all the time?”
I froze. He was not happy with me and was letting me know it.
“Yes,” I stuttered, determined to maintain my own half-smile.
I was aching to get out of there for a breath of air when I remembered that I had earlier discussed with staff the possibility of having my picture taken with the president. I had been told that, when the interview was over, I could stand up with him and the White House photographer would snap a picture. Not wanting to waste the opportunity, I stood up and asked him to join me.
“Oh, she wants the photograph now,” he said from his still-seated position. He rose, stood beside me and put an arm around my shoulder. Taking his cue, I put an arm up around his shoulder and we both grinned for the cameras.
In my haste to leave I almost forgot the tapes and had to be reminded by the film crew to take them. I and my assistants bolted out to the street. We ran, high heels and all, across Lafayette Park. Running through rush-hour traffic, I thought that this had to be about as crazy as a journalist’s job gets.
I had just been admonished by the president of the United States and now I was turning cartwheels in order to get the interview on air. As I dashed past a waste bin, I had a fleeting urge to throw in the tapes and run home instead.
At the studio I handed over the tapes. My phone rang. It was MC, and her voice was cold.
“We just want to say how disappointed we are in the way you conducted the interview,” she said.
“How is that?” I asked.
“You talked over the president, not letting him finish his answers.”
“Oh, I was just moving him on,” I said, explaining that I wanted some new insight from him, not two-year-old answers.
“He did give you plenty of new stuff.”
She estimated that I had interrupted the president eight times and added that I had upset him. I was upset too, I told her. The line started to break up; I was in a basement with a bad phone signal. I took her number and agreed to call her back. I dialled the White House number and she was on the line again.
“I’m here with Colby,” she indicated.
“Right.”
“You were given an opportunity to interview the leader of the free world and you blew it,” she began.
I was beginning to feel as if I might be dreaming. I had naively believed the American president was referred to as the “leader of the free world” only in an unofficial tongue-in-cheek sort of way by outsiders, and not among his closest staff.
“You were more vicious than any of the White House press corps or even some of them up on Capitol Hill . . .The president leads the interview,” she said.
“I don’t agree,” I replied, my initial worry now turning to frustration. “It’s the journalist’s job to lead the interview.”
It was suggested that perhaps I could edit the tapes to take out the interruptions, but I made it clear that this would not be possible.
As the conversation progressed, I learnt that I might find it difficult to secure further co-operation from the White House. A man’s voice then came on the line. Colby, I assumed. “And, it goes without saying, you can forget about the interview with Laura Bush.”
Clearly the White House had thought they would be dealing with an Irish “colleen” bowled over by the opportunity to interview the Bushes. If anyone there had done their research on RTE’s interviewing techniques, they might have known better.
MC also indicated that she would be contacting the Irish Embassy in Washington — in other words, an official complaint from Washington to Dublin.
“I don’t know how we are going to repair this relationship, but have a safe trip back to Ireland,” MC concluded. I told her I had not meant to upset her since she had been more than helpful to me. The conversation ended.
By the time I got to the control room, the Prime Time broadcast had just started. It was at the point of the first confrontation with the “leader of the free world” and those gathered around the monitors were glued to it. “Well done,” someone said. “This is great.”
I thought about the interview again as I climbed up the steps to RTE’s live camera position at Dromoland Castle to account for myself on the 6pm news next day. By now the White House had vented its anger to the Irish embassy in Washington. To make matters worse for the administration, the interview had made its way onto American television and CNN was replaying it around the world and by the end of the day it had been aired in Baghdad.
Had I been fair? Should I just have been more deferential to George Bush? I felt that I had simply done my job and shuddered at the thought of the backlash I would surely have faced in Ireland had I not challenged the president on matters that had changed the way America was viewed around the world.
Afterwards I bumped straight into the taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, who was waiting to go on air.
“Howya,” he said, winking.
“I hope this hasn’t caused you too much hassle, taoiseach,” I blurted.
“Arrah, don’t worry at all; you haven’t caused me one bit of hassle,” he smiled wryly.
I don’t know what he said to the president, who reportedly referred to the interview immediately upon arrival, but if the taoiseach was annoyed with me or with RTE, he didn’t show it.
When I returned to my little world on the street called M in Washington, I felt a tad more conspicuous than when I’d left for Ireland. Google was returning more than 100,000 results on the subject of the 12-minute interview. The vast majority of bloggers felt it was time a reporter had challenged Bush.
At the White House, the fact that I had been asked to submit questions prior to the interview generated enquiries from the American press corps. “Any time a reporter sits down with the president they are welcome to ask him whatever questions they want to ask,” Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, told the CBS correspondent Bill Plante.
“Yes, but that’s beside the point,” replied Plante.
Under repeated questioning, McClellan conceded that other staff members might have asked for questions. “Certainly there will be staff-level discussion, talking about what issues reporters may want to bring up in some of these interviews. I mean that happens all the time.”
I had not been prevented from asking any of my questions. The only topics I had been warned away from were the Bush daughters Jenna and Barbara, regular fodder for the tabloids, and Michael Moore — neither of which was on my list.
Moore did notice RTE’s interview with the president and in the weeks that followed urged American journalists to follow the example of “that Irish woman”.
“In the end, doesn’t it always take the Irish to speak up?” he said. “She’s my hero. Where are the Carole Colemans in the US press?”
© Carole Coleman 2005
BOOK OFFER
This article is extracted from the opening chapter of Alleluia America! by Carole Coleman, to be published by The Liffey Press on October 14 at €14.95.
Okay, as long as....SM
you don't mind you, your loved ones, or someone else's loved ones to be killed BEFORE we take action, we can sit around and see who attacks us next. But then of course, if Saddam had ordered an attack, or slipped the goods to someone to carry that attack out, you would have blamed Bush for not acting on all that intelligence we had before the war. You simply cannot have it both ways. In light of the fact that 3000 people perished in a couple of hours, I'm not afraid to stand behind a president brave enough to stand up to any threat.
What took them so long????
I heard the 34% was down to 29% for Bush and 18% for Cheney. It has taken this complete break down of our government for people to finally see what most of us have known all along. BUSH IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE ROTARY CLUB, LET ALONE THE U.S. The words incompetence and tin ear and arrogance are now coming out of the mouths of the staunchest of Republicans, senators, congressmen, strategists, advisors, etc. And the outright lies are finally coming to light, thanks to videotape. Of course we only have the pre Katrina tape but it shows those who absolutely refused to entertain the thought that his president was anything than honorable is, in fact, just a greedy arrogant politician like so many others. As I said before, time to storm the Bastille and throw them out, the whole sorry lot of them or we can always sell the country to the UAE. They would probably do a better job of running it than this poor excuse for an administration. As Isabel from Florida said on Lou Dobbs the other day, I could run this country better from my kitchen table. I believe her.
that is a long
string of words that is so illogical I just slap my rump and shout hallelujah. Not much more can be done other than that.
so as long as you don;t have to
pay for other people's children . . . you're okay with teenagers raising babies.
I come from a long
line of Twaddles, and we are a prominent family in our community.
Wow - how long did it take you to think of that one?
You should be one of Obama's political advisors. You know, you bein' so SMART an' all.
And your message was posted by: "?"
Does that stand for clueless or just 'can't spell my own name?'
I love Obama supporters. They're like children. Or really, really slow-learning monkeys. :)
Oh yes....and how long
did people scream and shout about how we were losing the surge in Iraq while we were successful? Obama didn't even want to admit we were successful when there was no way to dispute the fact. Just once, I would like to see you post something that isn't totally one-sided liberal, kool-aid drinking BS.
I think as long as there is anything
other than Islam, they will always perceive a threat to Islam. The threat is our very existence. Whether radical Muslims kill others outright - or breed, recruit/convert and infiltrate us out of existence, we are not to be tolerated as we are. They are not content to live side-by-side and allow everyone to worship whatever god (or no god) we wish in whatever way we please. The American ideal off Christians, Jews, Muslims and other religious living as neighbors along the same street is horrifying to these people. There is only one right choice!
They do not wish a settlement of the Palestinian issue, because this is the catalyst to stir up old conflicts when things seem to be settling down. I do not believe you can achieve peace through any amount of niceness and talking, or anything other than victory - and neither do they.
The best we can hope for is a temporary detente from time to time. This is not to be perceived as the end of the show, but intermission while they think of some other way to achieve their goals, (as we should be.) But instead, we get a Palestiniann and an Israeli to shake hands at Camp David, then start singing Ding-Dong The Witch is Dead. I have to wonder if it naivete or arrogance on our part.
That's just how it is and how it has been for a long time.
Doesn't seem to be anything we can do about it. As someone has said, it's a privately owned board and the political alliance appears to be very right-wing evangelical Christian. The Religion board used to be even worse than the Politics board until it got renamed Christian (now at least it's named for what it really is). I don't even look at that board anymore.
How long a truce?
Okay, lets see how long your ************ truce********* lasts, LOLOL..Humor me..Lets read your posts under a ********truce******..Wanna bet how long they will last from you one of the Queens of Judgment?? Can I call your arse to task when you step off your ******* truce*******..You bet I will..So, honey, keep posting good posts, debate posts and you will be **in**, jump off that and your arse is fried..
I haven't been here that long but
long enough to see clearly how immaturely they operate. PHEW!
Freepers have been around for a long while...
And I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you about the posts on FreeRepublic. I have the site bookmarked and I look at it pretty often. It's true that you can find liberals ranting on their own sites and some of that gets pretty hateful and scary sometimes too - but I can understand why. They've been threatened once too often and they're just not going to take it anymore.
Freepers don't have that excuse. Many of them are hateful and aggressive as a way of life and love spreading it around. What is their excuse for threatening the lives of liberals as often as they do? - a liberal might give them HEALTH CARE? Yeah I guess that's a killing offense.
But anyway if you haven't noticed any threatening posts by Freepers, obviously, you're not looking for them - and that must be a full-time job. Either that or you agree with the worst of them, in which case what's not to like?
Kudos to the Freepers for raising money for Katrina - puts them on par with the many liberal and bipartisan groups doing the same. It should be a group effort.
Now if they'd stop supporting torture, religious discrimination and intrusive anti-Constitutional government policies as well, maybe they'd lose their dumb-butt reputations.
|
