That money will go overseas as long as U.S. citizens keep
Posted By: their mouths shut! nm on 2009-03-06
In Reply to: I meant rather than funding ABORTION, which was the point of the original sm - CDW
xx
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
Jobs going overseas
I forgot to mention - as MSMT said in her post titled "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's wrong with the economy" - it stated on yahoo was an article about the layoffs at Dell in Austin.
"Everyone in the room was fired, their jobs shipped overseas".
That's one instance.
I'm taking an online course and 6 students wrote in stating they need to get retrained because they just lost their jobs within the last month. Their job went overseas.
Dont you get it?! Businesses WILL go overseas
nm
Unlawful donors from overseas????
Watchdog Group Presses for Obama Donor List |
Monday, October 27, 2008 10:59 AM
By: Dave Eberhart |
Article Font Size ![](http://www.newsmax.com/images/layout/minus.jpg") ![](http://www.newsmax.com/images/layout/plus.jpg") |
|
Judicial Watch contends that the Obama campaign continues to stonewall on listing its many donors, a step that would go a long way toward clearing up whether the Democratic presidential candidate is accepting unlawful contributions from overseas.
Sen. Barack Obama has raised about $3.3 million from contributors who did not list a home state or who designated their state with an abbreviation that did not match one of the 50 states or U.S. territories, The Associated Press reported, citing records from the Federal Election Commission.
The $3.3 million total does not include donors who have given less than $200 and whose contributions do not have to be itemized. Some of that money also could have come from overseas. About half of Obama's $455 million in contributions so far are un-itemized.
The campaign does not identify those donors, the AP report said.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “While the evidence suggests illegal foreign contributions are flooding into Obama's campaign coffers, we have no idea as to the extent of the problem because Senator Obama refuses to divulge the names of all of his donors.”
Fitton said that, when Obama campaign spokesman David Axelrod was asked about the decision to keep these donor names secret, he replied, “We’re probably more forthcoming about disclosure than anyone.”
But the president of the watchdog group countered: “Not true. While John McCain has had problems of his own for allegedly accepting foreign donations, to his credit, Senator McCain does publish the names of all donors to his presidential campaign on his Internet site, regardless of the size of the contribution.”
Fitton said he believes that the Obama campaign appears to be playing fast and loose with campaign finance laws, and he said it has to stop.
The FEC should investigate these allegations immediately, and the Obama campaign should publicly list the source of every single campaign contribution, Fitton said.
“Frankly, it is suspicious that these names have not already been made public,” he said. “There is something deeply unsettling about the fact that foreign nationals can so easily corrupt our presidential election through illegal contributions, while American service men and women stationed overseas may be deprived of the opportunity to even vote.”
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved. |
|
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/donor_obama_watchdog/2008/10/27/144469.html
The big green businesses are already overseas.......
xx
Overseas equals cheap labor
It is because labor is cheaper in third world countries, so corporations and their stock holders make more money with dirt cheap labor. Bush and his group do not care about the middle class, he has proved that over the last..how many years..feels like 40 to me..Right now we are seeing this happen in medical transcription. The company I work for sends out 30% of the work to India and they have a partnership with the Indian company. The other day I had to call American Express and could hardly understand the guy his Indian accent was so thick. They just care about making the rich richer. Greenspan when interviewed on 60 Minutes said America is becoming the rich and the working poor with no middle class and he said something needs to be done about it..But this is the way many corporations, who just so happen to mostly vote Republican, want it.
I would wager a guess that the troops overseas...sm
have much more pressing matters to attend to, than sending campaign contributions to the various candidates.
The proof will be in the election results, as to who they actually vote for.
The majority of our military would cringe at the thought of a commander in chief who regards them with disrespect (I hear it from my military relatives)
They'll vote for McCain, all the way.
Please be right about taxing companies that send buisness overseas.
Wouldn't that be a jolt to the economy? I'd bet it would bring back at least half of the jobs lost to Mexico, India, and China. MTs would sure be in a slightly better position if it cost MTSOs more money to do business outside of the US than in it.
That would be a bill I would support - as long as they didn't attack so much pork to it!
In order to curtail shipping jobs overseas
our F.L. must first crack the whip on Congress, who are the ones that can change tax codes to make offshoring less profitable. ''Yes we can'' will have to take a back seat as long as special interests can spread around enough dough to Congress to buy ''Oh no you can't!''
I'm no Obama fan, but don't we all realize that presidential candidates run on a wish list of items they would like to implement, knowing that they will never be permitted to accomplish many of these things? But, gosh darn it, they still get credit for trying real hard!
Obama may believe he has a Dem-majority congress firmly in hand, but these guys count on campaign money for re-election. And that money is, for the most part, donated by business interests. The businesses certainly do not consider these to be charitable gifts, but investments in obtaining legislative outcomes that work for them.
Obama has, at most, one presidential re-election to worry about. Congressmen can run for unlimited terms and have to make very long-range calculations before they dare to offend offshoring companies by closing tax loopholes that make it better for them to offshore than not.
Thanks to Obama? Get Real. He didn't send jobs overseas....
Most MT companies will not offshore work. Most hospitals and large clinics DEMAND that their work not be sent overseas. Unfortunately, you have those that LIE and I worked for an MT company that sent overload work to India. It was indeed, unfortunate, as the quality was horrible. But, I've trained plenty of MTs who were just as bad with "supposed" experience. They could pass a test, they just couldn't work accurately consistently. I blame that on the "production pay system." I learned MT when they used to respect you and paid you by the hour. There was no demand on HOW MUCH as long as it was COMPLETELY accurate.
oh yea - good point - bringing our medical records back from overseas
Never thought of that one.
You'll be waiting a long, long time, then, cuz she's going to do
Printing money we dont have? Borrowing money
nm
Just look at what US citizens have been through
at stake in this election, not just for us, but the rest of the world. Everyone is on-edge, pissed-off, nervous, angry, fearful, hopeful, etc. You name it, the emotion is out there. It's likely that regardless of the outcome of this election, there will be protests and possibly violence by the losing side. So that's got me nervous, as well. Our entire governent needs a major overhaul & housecleaning.
Anyway, yes, your feelings are accurate, and have mainly to do with our fear for our futures. This election will essentially decide whether I my later years in a modest, (but at least HEATED!) apartment, with some food in the cupboards and a savings to draw on, or whether I spend those years living in a cardboard box underneath a freeway overpass.
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.
Seasoned Citizens sm
To season a citizen you use a dash of salt and pepper, a pinch of Viagra (mycoxaflopin), and a fine sprinkling of "OxyFast."
Have been following the news about Pakistan.
We are all citizens of the world.
The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can put an end to war and try to do something to protect this planet before it self-destructs.
The Majority of Citizens?
Let's see tomorrow morning.
Like containing disorderly citizens? nm
x
my children are citizens
they were born in Germany yet they are US citizens and German citizens. They have dual citizenship. they are US citizens and they have a born abroad certificate which is the proof of their US citizenship which is exactly the same as a b/c. you guys crack me up. and no i am not an O fan, but i think that this would have been the FIRST thing that McCain and Palin would have pointed out had all this crap been true.
Yes, concerned citizens can be
nm
Yes, proposed changes, which citizens cant
nm
Law abiding citizens don't have anything to worry about...sm
Just the same way a warranted wire tap should not have any problems procuring a warrant. It's too bad you don't see the potential for corruption here(and accusations are already floating).
As far as phone companies passing out private info, you have to give consent for companies to share your private information with other companies legally. That's why we have Consumer Privacy Laws (or is this a thing of the past too? No, really is it?)
No, but Illinois citizens are so used to corrupt
even this guy has suddenly made them stand up and take notice...... what a sorry crook! He'd probably sell his mother for a buck.
There are many Muslim-Americans who are citizens of the US. (nm)
They are eligible to vote in the presidential election and are just as concerned about the important political issues as everyone else in this country!
Citizens are allowed to vote
with any motivation they wish - FOR someone, AGAINST someone, because they had soup for lunch, etc. Supreme Court (hey there's a case someone can discuss) upheld same-day registration and voting. Since they know the constitution and the law, I will trust their judgment.
The election system is OBVIOUSLY sound, because when Ohioans suggested that the Bush reelection count was rigged, they were denounced as conspiracy theorists. One cannot have it both ways.
However, he did not believe that all citizens are equal under the law. Shame on ...sm
you likening BO to Hitler.
Sorry, but according to the law, anchor babies are US citizens - nm
x
Pop 8 was vote of MAJORITY of citizens who said NO...
--
It takes money to make money. nm
I never said citizens weren't allowed to vote.
I just do not think that same day register and voting should be allowed. That is my personal opinion and I have the right to have that opinion regardless on how a court ruled on the subject.
Shouldn't the citizens of Alaska take care of that
-
Anchor babies are natural citizens... sm
by virtue of being born on American soil, just as the babies of Chinese immigrants or German immigrants or any other nationality are citizens of this country if they are born on US soil. Granted, the influx of illegal aliens from Mexico has created a problem in that it has burdened the welfare system in this country, but that is not the issue here.
The issue is that Obama cannot produce proof that he is a natural born American citizen. The birth certificate floating around the internet purported to be real is a fake. You can find anything on the internet these days, true or not. Just the fact that liberals shoot down every article posted in support of a conservative's point of view as being "not a credible source" is proof of that.
Mr. Obama is well aware of the questions being raised concerning his birth certificate. If he had a REAL birth certificate, why would he just not produce it and put an end to all the speculation? Because he can't, plain and simple. He flew to Hawaii to see his ailing grandmother and "coincidentally" his "birth records" were sealed at the same time. Isn't that interesting?
Mr. Obama lived for 5 years in Indonesia, a country that does not recognize dual citizenship, therefore nullifying his American citizenship IF it ever existed in the first place. There are no records on file where he ever applied for citizenship after returning to the US.
We have to produce birth certificates for our children to attend school today. Why shouldn't the man who would be POTUS have to show his?
Barack Obama is not even legally a black American. He only has one black great-great-grandmother on his father's side while the other 7 were Arab.
That makes him 50% white, 43.75% Arab, and 6.25% black. 12.5% is the minimum required to legally claim any racial status in America.
Obama would qualify as the first Arab-American president, NOT the first black president. That is why they keep saying "African-American" and NOT black because they know he is African Arab and not African black.
Why would you want anyone who has any kind of questionable background leading our country? Would you allow persons of questionable background to teach your children in school? What if that person was suspected of having an inappropriate relationship with a child but it could not be proven? Would you want to run that risk?
I agree that America has more pressing problems that whether the man about to take the helm is a natural born citizen, but do you want someone who is not even an American leading us through these problems?
Because crabby, no matter how greedy the citizens are/were SM
It wasn't just the brokers or just the people who weren't as smart as you not to get an ARM, it was under the leadership of GW......! the lack of leadership. This is why I've called you uneducated, because the information out there about every issue under the sun is there if you care to educate yourself. It's ludicrous to say that someone earned $1500 a month and shouldn't have gotten a $300K mortgage. Your beloved Bush, is the one who PUSHED THROUGH THE ZERO DOWN PAYMENT,,, the worst idea ever.
You're really worried about your fellow citizens?
because if that were the case, you would be asking him why he continues to let illegals and overseas workers with visas into this country to take those very jobs they report are gone.
You don't know any of this is going on because you don't pay attention to anything unless Obama has said it. If he doesn't tell you illegals are taking these jobs, then you'll just pretend they are not. Sorry you don't feel illegals taking our jobs to the tune of 1.5 million right now isn't MORE important than spending more of your money.
Ever stop to think if they didn't have the jobs, Americans would?
No they absolutely do NOT represent the citizens of this country
So pompous and self-righteous.
I think Bush's administration was the joke, since you asked. At least now we have someone intelligent and not self-absorbed.
I suffered through the abomination of the Bush administration in silence. You bet your sweet bippy I'm celebrating Obama's presidency and the return to power of the Democratic party. I hope to GOD I never see the likes of Dumbya as president again!!!
Still not torture. Poilcemen TAZER our own citizens.
Heck, the 'resource officers' at my kid's high school tazed a kid for spitting in the commons area.
Maybe we should just taze the terrorists. I'll bet they'll talk then. When they start sh!tting themselves and going into convulsions, I'll bet they'll cough up whatever info they have.
Plus, it'll save on the Gitmo water bill, and I think we're ALL for that.
It must be hard for you to accept that even the DEMS voted to keep Gitmo going.
Hey, maybe the terrorits could all live at YOUR house. You guys seem to have a lot in common.
the children born here are automatically citizens -
At one point in time, if a mother and father were here illegally and a child was born, the father would be deported, but the mother could stay until the child was 18. I don't know if that has changed or not.
Those things are citizens exercising free speech,
The world they have been living in under the Patriot Act has pushed them into dark corners underground. They are the ones who ended up on the wrong side of that line in the and Bush drew after 911 when he said, "you are either for us or against us."
They all work, just like you and me, but sacrifice greatly for their activism. If you think the coverage you are getting about who they are, what they are saying or where they come from is fair, you are the one who is living on another planet. You skipped the part about police sweeping up reporters and bystanders, beating them up while hosing them down and dragging them away.
Take a look back into history some 30-40 years ago. These same "things" were the guys who marched and protested on behalf of civil rights for blacks and women and against the last wrong war were had. Yesterday's "things, today's authors, senators, congressmen, journalists, etc.
You must have been born AFTER their struggles bore fruit. Otherwise, you would not be so glib and would have no need to ask such inane questions.
Air Force chief: Test weapons on US citizens before using on enemies.
Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.
The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.
If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation, said Wynne. (Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press.
The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.
Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.
On another subject, Wynne said he expects to choose a new contractor for the next generation aerial refueling tankers by next summer. He said a draft request for bids will be put out next month, and there are two qualified bidders: the Boeing Co. and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the majority owner of European jet maker Airbus SAS.
The contract is expected to be worth at least $20 billion (&euro15.75 billion).
Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing lost the tanker deal in 2004 amid revelations that it had hired a top Air Force acquisitions official who had given the company preferential treatment.
Wynne also said the Air Force, which is already chopping 40,000 active duty, civilian and reserves jobs, is now struggling to find new ways to slash about $1.8 billion (&euro1.4 billion) from its budget to cover costs from the latest round of base closings.
He said he can't cut more people, and it would not be wise to take funding from military programs that are needed to protect the country. But he said he also incurs resistance when he tries to save money on operations and maintenance by retiring aging aircraft.
We're finding out that those are, unfortunately, prized possessions of some congressional districts, said Wynne, adding that the Air Force will have to take some appetite suppressant pills. He said he has asked employees to look for efficiencies in their offices.
The base closings initially were expected to create savings by reducing Air Force infrastructure by 24 percent. |
|
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html |
Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia
Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel issued the following statement following the U.S. Department of Justice’s denial of preclearance of Georgia’s voter verification process
Atlanta - “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.
“DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.
“This process is critical to protecting the integrity of our elections. We have evidence that non-citizens have voted in past Georgia elections and that more than 2,100 individuals have attempted to register, yet still have questions regarding their citizenship. Further, the Inspector General’s office is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.
“It is important to underscore that not a single person has come forward to say he or she could not vote because of the verification process. Further, while DOJ argues that the process is somehow discriminatory, the historic voter turnout among Hispanic and African-American voters in the 2008 general elections clearly says otherwise.
“This decision provides a specific example of the inherently illogical and unfair nature of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. It is a sad day for the rights of our state and for the integrity of our elections. I remain committed to continuing the fight for citizenship verification. In the coming days, I will consider every option available to the state, including the possibility of legal action.”
Background:
As required by law and ordered by federal courts in October 2008, the eligibility of new applicants to register and vote is checked against the Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) and Social Security Administration databases to ensure that individuals registering to vote report similar information. If information in these databases does not match information reported on the voter registration form, the applicant is asked to clarify the information. Additionally, if the applicant previously reported to DDS that he or she is not a U.S. citizen, that person is asked by a registrar to provide proof of citizenship.
Prior to the November 2008 General Election, Secretary Handel sent letters to 4,771 voter registration applicants whose records at DDS indicated they were not U.S. citizens, asking them to provide documentation of their citizenship. As of March 2009, 2,148 of these applicants still have chosen not to resolve the question about their U.S. citizenship.
In the November 2008 General Election, county election officials reported that 599 individuals cast a challenged ballot because the voter had previously indicated to DDS that he or she was not a United States citizen and had not resolved their status with county officials at the time of the election. Of those, 369 ballots were accepted because the voter provided documentation of their citizenship after the election; and 230 were rejected because the individual chose not to confirm his or her citizenship status.
On October 10, 2008, activist organizations including the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit to attempt to prevent Georgia from verifying the eligibility of applicants to register and vote in the November General Election, including whether those individuals were citizens of the United States.
On October 16, 2008, U.S. District Court Judge Jack Camp denied the motion by MALDEF and ACLU; directed the State to continue the verification process; and acknowledged the State’s requirements to verify information under the Help America Vote Act. In his order, Judge Camp stated:
HAVA requires that Defendant Handel match information in the statewide voter registration database with information from the Georgia DDS and the SSA databases “to the extent necessary to enable each such official to verify the accuracy of the information provided on the applications for voter registration.”
Judge Camp also stated: ...
Charging is not spending money...it is spending someone elses money!
When you are debt free (as we are) THEN you spend money...anything else is just going into debt. I highly doubt he pays cash for anything.
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.
|
