The expanse of Mr. Roberts’s ministry, coupled with his fiery preaching, tycoonlike vision and jet-set lifestyle, also attracted persistent questions throughout his career about his theology and his unorthodox fund-raising techniques, although no credible evidence of malfeasance was ever produced on his watch.
Sarah would call Trig—who was born with Down syndrome—“my little Down’s baby.” But I couldn’t believe it when she would come over to us and sometimes say, playing around, “No, I don’t want the retarded baby—I want the other one,” and pick up Tripp. That was just her—even her kids were used to it.That doesn't sounds like compassionate conservatism to me. Does this sound like a woman you can trust to lead anything?
Climbing K2 Early Summit Day Shared Summits Expedition from Chris Warner on Vimeo.
And to the top:K2 Climbing to the Summit Shared Summits Expedition from Chris Warner on Vimeo.
"There is something about her which is very hard not to be drawn into," says Colin Robinson, co-publisher at OR Books, which is putting out a collection of essays pulled together by two senior editors at The Nation magazine. "It might be a sort of adoration. Or it might be that one is appalled. But you can't stop watching."Blog on friends. Blog on all.
ARNE DUNCAN, the secretary of education, recently called for sweeping changes to the way we select and train teachers. He’s right. If we really want good schools, we need to create a critical mass of great teachers.Nice sentiment, but until teachers are paid an attractive wage, I'm not certain there will be enough bait in the mix to persuade great people toward the profession.
The eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice that of a 4.6-litre Land Cruiser driven 10,000 kilometres a year, researchers have found.If I had a favorable back yard, I'd have chickens - fresh eggs daily? What's not to love.
Victoria University professors Brenda and Robert Vale, architects who specialise in sustainable living, say pet owners should swap cats and dogs for creatures they can eat, such as chickens or rabbits, in their provocative new book Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living.
The couple have assessed the carbon emissions created by popular pets, taking into account the ingredients of pet food and the land needed to create them.
"If you have a German shepherd or similar-sized dog, for example, its impact every year is exactly the same as driving a large car around," Brenda Vale said.
Egypt / Lebanon Montage from Khalid Mohtaseb on Vimeo.
Ilulissat icebergs from icescapes on Vimeo.
In a recent survey sponsored by the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, 65 percent of physicians indicated approval of the concept of a “public option” to expand health care in America.Well, 65% is a pretty big number. Read the remainder of the article. It's very good and the author is no slouch, political hack.
A clear majority of Americans -- 72 percent -- support a government-sponsored health care plan to compete with private insurers, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Intro - Balloon Boy Is Safe | ||||
| ||||
President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to build momentum behind his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim worldand stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.Clearly, Mr. Bush would not have even been on the consideration list for such an award. Let's hope this award cements Obama's determination to take us and the world in the opposite direction that Mr. Bush was leading us toward. And may we not be in a position to consider carpet bombing an entire nation ever again.
For many people who do not have bank accounts, or cannot get a credit card, the appeal is irresistible, making the reloadable cards among the consumer banking industry’s fastest-growing products. But their convenience comes with a catch: fees, often hidden in the fine print.Caveat Emptor, indeed! Banks are looking more and more like loan sharks, but they are not likely to break your knee caps before the bankrupt you.
The MiCash Prepaid MasterCard docks cardholders a $9.95 activation fee. Like many competitors, it then charges numerous recurring fees, including $1.75 for each A.T.M. withdrawal, $1 for each A.T.M. balance inquiry, 50 cents for each purchase, $4 for monthly maintenance, $2 for inactivity after 60 days and $1 for a call to customer service.
In a wide-ranging, 80-minute speech to fund managers in Hong Kong today, Palin spoke about issues ranging from Alaskan fishing to energy independence to U.S.-Sino ties. She repeated calls for “market-oriented” health-care reform and said governments shouldn’t regulate executive compensation.Well, right there we see the fundamental flaw in Palin's logic. She doesn't believe the government should control executive pay, but we should be looking out fot the Moms and Pops who will have to burn their life savings to cover the costs of their "insurance" premiums in order to ensure the fat cats at the top are stuffed to the gills with profits? Can you protect the fat cats while watching out for the "little" guys? When Sarah Palin claims to speak for the people, the US of A is in for a bumpy ride.
The Fed and the government sent a message to companies that “the bigger that you are, the more problems that you get yourself into, the more likely the government is to bail you out,” Palin said in the closed door speech, according to a tape of the event given to Bloomberg News. “Of course the little guys are left out then. We’re left holding the bag, all the moms and pops all over America.”
"I'm going to call it like I see it and I will share with you candidly a view right from Main Street, Main Street U.S.A.," Palin told a room full of asset managers and other finance professionals, according to a video of part of the speech obtained by the Associated Press. "And how perhaps my view of Main Street . . . how that affects you and your business."Since when does a former Veep candidate, a former Governer who quit, and turned highly paid public speaker represent the "people" of America? I'm left wondering how the people in the "packed" audiance was able to stomach the event, and also how much she was paid to deliver this horse manure.
I served with John McCain in the Tonkin Gulf and later served on the staff of CTF-77 staff where I learned the truth about high ranking military commanders. They always want more resources and those resources are always comprised mainly of troops. They promise their political masters in Washington victory if just given a little more. And they present the terrible vision of defeat if they don't get their way. That way they can blame Washington when they, as they know they will, fail. President Obama is being set up to be the President who failed in the war on terror by the men wearing stars on their shoulders and colorful evidence of their bloody experience on their chests.
I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer — the frantic efforts to paint our first black president as the Other, a foreigner, socialist, fascist, Marxist, racist, Commie, Nazi; a cad who would snuff old people; a snake who would indoctrinate kids — had much to do with race.Racism is the GOP's elephant in the room that no one is dicussing. Unfortunately, the right thinking republicans (if there are any), may not have the spine to challenge their racist peers.
On September 8, in what the Department of Education is touting as a "historic" speech, President Obama will be talking directly to students across the U.S., live on the White House website. But some parents and conservatives are blasting the president, calling the speech an excuse to brainwash American children.Interesting. Instead of marveling at the fact that the President is using new technology "broadcast" a live discussion to students across America about the importance of education, the right wingers do what? Of course, if the riechwingers witnessed GWB doing the same thing, and talking about abstinence, would their tone be different? You betchya.
Mr. Hall and his colleagues -- there are about 55 in the Westport office, and handfuls in London and Singapore -- specialize in a variety of hedging and arbitrage techniques.With Vegas, at least the house wins. In this case, these free-marketeers wreak havoc on the pricing of such things as oil, continually screwing with the American people. Where's the conscience? Where's the regulation?
Generally, Phibro looks for anomalies in the market and pounces, taking advantage of unusual spreads between the spot price of oil and the price of an oil futures contract.
The company, for example, often wagers that the price of oil will rise so fast during a particular period, say six months, that it can make money by storing oil in supertankers and floating it until the price goes up. (If the price rises by more than it costs to lease the tankers, he makes money.)
Q So, polls. Two of them, one on health care, showing 46 percent disapproving of the President's handling of health care, and then on the Gates issue, with 41 percent disapproving -- different poll, but 41 percent disapproving of how the President is handling -- handled that incident. Is this something that --Humm...sounds like a Bush Administration deflect, doesn't it? Further...
MR. GIBBS: Forty, I'm sorry --
Q Forty-one disapproving of how the President has handled the Gates incident. Is this something that you are all worried about? They're coming at the same time. The Gates incident is pulling away from attention on health care; even the President has said that. How are you -- how are you going to get past this?
MR. GIBBS: No, I think he -- well, I think he said that last week. I don't -- I haven't noticed that --
Q Actually he said -- I believe it was yesterday, didn't he? That people aren't talking about health care as much?
MR. GIBBS: I don't remember that.
Q Maybe I'm wrong.
MR. GIBBS: I know he said that last Friday. I don't think the President believes that that incident has posed a distraction; here we are next Thursday.
Q Well, it's pulling down his approval rating, particularly among working --
MR. GIBBS: The Gates situation?
Q Yes, among working-class --
MR. GIBBS: I think that's a lot to extrapolate into one --
Q I'm just telling you what the poll has said, so I'm wondering if you're worried about it and what you guys can do about it.
MR. GIBBS: I neither believe the premise nor am I worried about it.
Q And back to the Gates event today at the White House, why not allow the press to get closer to the table to be able to at least have some sort of conversation or something with the parties involved?Well, given that the President, Gates and the Officer involved are all intelligent men, I'm not certain what that teachable moment might be, but I don't think the press has the right to sit at the same table of a private meeting among three people trying to work out a great misunderstanding.
MR. GIBBS: Again, I think I mentioned to Jake, if those two gentlemen want to talk to you guys, there's no prohibition --
Q Right, but that's if they want to, but typically when you have events --
MR. GIBBS: In other words, shouldn't I just simply make them talk to you. (Laughter.) I appreciate the -- that's --
Q Well, no -- no, I do want to follow up on that. I mean, specifically, there are events that happen here at the White House, we're invited in, we get a chance to either ask questions of the parties there, and if they choose to come out we can get additional information from them. In this case, we won't have anything there and most likely won't get anything when they come out.
MR. GIBBS: Well, you'll have to ask them on the latter part.
Q But what about on the earlier part?
Q What about the President? I mean, why is the President in a cone of silence on this? (Laughter.) You're saying those two can come out and talk, but he can't.
Q He wants to make it a teachable moment. Why --
Q What's the lesson he wants to teach?
Q We're students, we're his students, Robert.
MR. GIBBS: The President feels comfortable with the way this is laid out, and looks forward to --
Q But why doesn't he see this as an opportunity, if he wants to make it a teachable moment, to come out and talk and teach what he learned, what he wants the nation to learn?
MR. GIBBS: You guys will have a chance to talk to the President -- one of you will later today, and maybe you can ask him.
Q Two questions, Robert, first one having to do with the Gates-Crowley meeting today. If we're not going to be able to listen to the conversation and the three men are not going to talk to the press afterwards --Of course, the press,presses on, and we find out that the families of the gentlemen will be attending, and of course, the Union Rep will be the consigliery for the cop.
MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't know -- the decision by Sergeant Crowley or Professor Gates to talk to the press is entirely up to them.
Q Okay, but you're not going to orchestrate it here at the White House is all I meant.
MR. GIBBS: Again, I've not talked to them or their representatives. If they want to go to the stakeout they're certainly welcome to do that.
Q Okay. But I guess the question, as the President said -- the President said he wants this to be a teachable moment. How do you envision this being a teachable moment?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the -- I think many people would have hardly imagined something like this happening this time last week. I think having them get together to talk -- the President talked to both of these men last week. They're decent, honorable, good men. To get together and talk about what's going on in this country is a positive thing, even if you're not able to hear each and every word of it. I think that kind of dialogue is what has to happen at every level of -- every level of our society if we're going to make progress on issues that have -- we've been dealing with for quite some time.
Q I guess I could just request I'm sure on everybody's behalf that we find out and have as thorough a debrief from you as possible so that we can make it as much of a teachable moment as possible.
MR. GIBBS: I will try to get that -- like I said, I won't be there, but I will endeavor to see what I can get.
Q Right, but you're close with one of the guys who will.
MR. GIBBS: I know the President, yes.
Q If you could provide us with some more logistics of the event this evening, apparently you decided you don't want to splash beer on Malia and Sasha's picnic table -- probably a smart thing. Can you talk about --Interesting. But really, how does this meeting advance the conversation and public discourse on race dynamics in America might have been a better question. Instead we get this.
MR. GIBBS: Well, I -- (laughter) -- I don't -- yes, for any number of probably good reasons, that's a -- I don't know if -- I know there were a couple of different locations that were being talked about -- some of this, weather permitting. Obviously there's a couple of different tables, one right out by the Oval Office and then one down a bit in the Rose Garden, and I'm not sure where we landed on that yet.
Q The picture we're going to get appears to be the three principals, but there are a number of people coming here, by my understanding. Are they all going to get together? What are you doing with the other guys?
MR. GIBBS: I don't know what -- I know that each of -- each -- Professor Gates and Sergeant Crowley have family that are coming with them. I know there -- they will arrive here, be greeted, taken on a tour. They'll have a chance to get some pictures, they'll see the President. And I don't know if -- I don't know if the President will meet together with all of them as a big group or not. I can certainly check on the logistics of that.
Q You've got police union officials coming, as well?
MR. GIBBS: They may be coming certainly with Sergeant Crowley.
Q Robert, going back to Sergeant Crowley and Professor Gates, what do you hope, tomorrow morning when you wake up, what do you hope you will have accomplished?Wow, did he really take off his tie, or is Gibbs talking for the President? Even so, that's one long run on for one Presidential Press Spokesmodel.
MR. GIBBS: No more questions about what kind of drink they're going to drink? (Laughter.)
Q Okay, but besides that, what do you hope you will look back --
MR. GIBBS: Small expectations.
Q -- what do you hope to -- what's your best-case scenario for looking back and seeing, we accomplished this last night; we were able to --
MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't think -- let me answer this not as the press secretary to the President but as a -- just as an average American citizen. I'll take my tie off and I'll be right back. Look, I think, again, just as the President said, this is -- obviously you had a situation many days ago that got a lot of attention, not the least of which was because of his word choice, which he's come out and said he wishes he hadn't used those words -- or that word; that each of these two individuals, again, are accomplished at what they do; they're honorable, decent men; that he believes this entire situation -- if we step back and have a better dialogue amongst each other and have a conversation about common hopes and common opportunities and common dreams, that we can make headway on some of the issues that have -- that we've been wrestling with for a long, long time.
And I think the President hopes that -- I don't think the President has out-sized expectations that one cold beer at one table here is going to change massively the course of human history by any sense of the imagination, but that he and the two individuals -- Sergeant Crowley and Professor Gates -- can hopefully provide a far different picture than what we've seen to date of this situation, and hopes, again, as I've said both today and before, that this is a conversation and a dialogue that happens not just because it's sponsored by or at the invitation of a participant or the President, but happens in communities, large and small, all over the country, in order to make progress through better understanding. And I think that's what the President wants to do today.
Q Can it be a teachable moment if the American people do not hear something that several of them -- several sides have asked for, including Professor Gates, I think, and that's the word "apology" during the conversation today?But the press goes on.
MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I don't want to get ahead of what may or may not be talked about. I think that's a bit premature, and I'd leave it obviously to individual participants, to Mr. Gates and Mr. Crowley, to make those comments and conversation.
Q You don't expect them to --
MR. GIBBS: I have not talked to either of the individuals so I can't even surmise on what to expect.
George, do you have a follow-up?
Q I've a question on the health care event yesterday. But on the Gates thing, the President has said he wants this to be a teachable moment. Regardless of who --Perhaps Gibbs should have said something like he's trying to sell a used car here. There's no good answer to the questions the press pose like the questions the press pose are not really good questions. Gibbs and the press are endeavoring in an unnecessary rhetorical charade, where Gibbs started to use the "teachable" moment as a means to deflect an honest answer to a small set of legit questions; which should have been like this:
MR. GIBBS: I'm sorry, are we on health care or Gates -- I'm sorry.
Q Gates.
MR. GIBBS: Okay, I'm sorry.
Q So he said he wants it to be a teachable moment. Regardless of who first proposed it, he, through his surrogates called these guys to the White House. But is he the teacher in this teachable moment?
MR. GIBBS: I think all of us are participants in a moment that we hope can teach all in this country that dialogue and communication will always improve the situation. I don't think today is -- I don't think the President looks at himself as, and I don't think today the President believes or the situation will be that one will be the teacher and others will be the students. I think the President believes that, hopefully through the example of communication and dialogue, that that can be a positive and lasting lesson for others.
Q Dialogue about what?
MR. GIBBS: About the situation that happened in Cambridge.
Q But how is that teachable for everybody? How is that teachable for the nation if it's just an incident between two men?
MR. GIBBS: Jake, it's something that's been covered quite a bit. I think it's something that has been -- you all have spent an awful lot of time covering. I don't think it's about an incident just involving two men. I think if it was an incident involving just two men you might not have done so many stories.
Q Well, some people think it's an incident about racial profiling; some people think it's an incident about disrespect for police; some people think it's -- I mean, there are a million different things that it could be a teachable lesson about, and we're not getting any --
MR. GIBBS: Not a million, but I don't doubt that there are more than just one.
Q We're just not -- you say it's a teachable moment. About what? Communication? I mean --
MR. GIBBS: No, I think it's a -- well, I think communication will help be part of -- I don't think -- again, Jake, I hate to surmise -- I hate to sort of move backwards in a hypothetical. I doubt you could have imagined a week ago in reporting this story that you'd have these two individuals here drinking beer with the President, right?
Q But we wouldn't have imagined that they'd be here and we wouldn't hear anything that's going to happen -- from the President. (Laughter.)
MR. GIBBS: I think you're feigning surprise on that one, Mr. Reid. But I think --
Q No, I really -- he's not using this as an opportunity.
MR. GIBBS: Well, I appreciate --
Q The only thing we're hearing that's a teachable moment example is we're going to get a photograph out of it or some film. I don't understand -- I mean --
MR. GIBBS: We don't have to do that.
Q Do you think the coverage has been -- it's been good that people have been covering this issue? You said there's been a lot of coverage. Is that a good thing?
MR. GIBBS: Some of it I think has, sure. I think --
Q Think how much more you could get if he came and talked to us.
MR. GIBBS: I feel like I'm trying to -- I feel like I'm buying a car.
Q - Can we come to the table and record the conversation?
Gibbs - No.
Q - Why not?
Gibbs - because it's meant to be a private conversation among the President, Gibbs, and Crowley to square away some major misunderstandings over a beer.
Q - Oh.
Gibbs - Perhaps the American people can find this as an instructive and productive way to sort out difference. Let's move on to something more important.
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford admits he used taxpayer money to see his mistress in Argentina and plans to repay the cash.Why any one has any faith in the GOP leadership at this point in the game is beyond me.
On behalf of the people of Illinois and New York, I’d like to thank South Carolina for giving us Mark (“I’ve been unfaithful to my wife”) Sanford. Finally, a governor who’s weirder than Rod Blagojevich and less responsible than Eliot Spitzer.Sample 2 -
The news that Senator John Ensign had had an affair with a former aide who was married to another former aide was fading. Polls showed some voter impatience with President Obama’s policies, if not with the president himself. And the Politico, the insidery Web site that is widely read in the capital’s political precincts, even featured an article exploring the possibility of a Republican Party comeback.Sample 3 -
Then Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, a fiscal conservative seen by many Republicans as an attractive standard-bearer for the next presidential campaign, went missing. Worse, he returned.
But his confession and apology, in a rambling, nationally televised news conference, left other mysteries unsolved, like whether he had lied to his staff members as late as Monday about his whereabouts, whether the affair had definitively ended, whether he would resign from the governorship and whether he would even have acknowledged the affair had he not been met at the airport in Atlanta by a reporter upon his return.Sample 4 -
Three and finally, while all the things above are all too true — at the same time we are in a hopelessly — or as you put it impossible — or how about combine and simply say hopelessly impossible situation of love. How in the world this lightening strike snuck up on us I am still not quite sure. As I have said to you before I certainly had a special feeling about you from the first time we met, but these feelings were contained and I genuinely enjoyed our special friendship and the comparing of all too many personal notes (and yes this is true even if you did occasionally tantalize me with sexual details over the years!) — but it was all safe. Where we are is not. I have thought about it and in some ways feel I let you down in letting these complications come into a friendship that I hope will last till death. In all my life I have lived by a code of honor and at a variety of levels know I have crossed lines I would have never imagined.Well, if that just doesn't sum it up, I don't know what does. Even so, I'm still wondering where's the moral outrage from those self-proclaimed "protectors" of "traditional" marriage? Where's the multimillion dollar machine that works for legislation that prevents republicans who cheat on their wives from ever getting married again? Doesn't Sanford's transgressions warrant some kind of litigious response? Really, Proposition H8 supporters aught be up in arms over Sanford's shenanigans.
COLUMBIA, S.C. – After going AWOL for seven days, Gov. Mark Sanford admitted Wednesday that he'd secretly flown to Argentina to visit a woman with whom he'd been having an affair. He apologized to his wife and four sons and said he will resign as head of the Republican Governors Association.And they say gays are bad for marriage? Where's the moral outrage from the Prop H8 supporters now? Sure the "right" doesn't have a corner on the hypocrisy market, but it sure seems like they have trademarked the whole spoiling the institution of marriage routine.
Sanford's announcement came a day after another prominent Republican, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, apologized to his GOP Senate colleagues after revealing last week that he had an affair with a campaign staffer and was resigning from the GOP leadership.Perhaps it's time for the Prop H8 supports to abandon their favored party.
I know this family personally. These two men have adopted this lovely girl. They love one another, and the fathers are raising their daughter in a fantastically positive environment. When these two men cannot marry, it hurts their family. 
Del died a few months later, before Proposition 8 passed. She died a married woman. As far as I know, we're still married. They haven't ruled yet about the people who got married, but most people think they're not going to cancel those marriages.Where's the harm if Del and Phyllis are married?
They were a San Francisco couple who had been together 51 years at that time. Talk about a relationship of love and devotion and constancy: It was really what marriage should be about.
are directed to set aside a minimum of 25% and not more than 33% of the Graduate Business Professional Fee revenue for need-based financial aid, with such funds to be used first to meet the demonstrated financial need of student in campus professional graduate degree programs in business....So, they increase your fees and collect your money which causes you to be in greater financial duress. This in turn requires you to petition for financial aid because you need help to pay them the increased fees. Essentially, you are loaning the University your money so that they may - at best give back to you and at worse loan to you to cover that additional set of fees which you may not have needed had they not increased the fees.
I'm wondering how much he gets paid for his "testimony" on various "talk" shows. "I don't think we should just roll over when the new administration ... accuses us of committing torture, which we did not, or somehow violating the law, which we did not," Cheney said. "I think you need to stand up and respond to that, and that's what I've done."Last I checked water boarding was a lot like torture & the W, Rove and Co spent a great deal of time, energy and taxpayer dollars bending the law to suit their wanton lust for torture.
Even if we found proof (which is debatable this exists) that torturing "detainees" led to information that stopped some kind of "terrorist" plot, did/do the ends justify the means? Explain.
As a bonus follow up question, do you think those who authorized the use of water boarding and other torture techniques should be prosecuted to the fullest extend of the law?
Q So is that an indication that you don't want to see an independent commission? I'm trying to understand.But even so, the door is left open later in the briefing.
MR. GIBBS: By dint, an independent commission would probably not be something that I would weigh in on if Congress were to create one of those. I think that -- from the larger perspective, the President believes, as both of us have said, that the release of the memos are not a time for a retribution but to reflect on what happens and that we're all best suited looking forward.
Q Robert, does the President believe someone ought to be punished for allowing waterboarding? He changed the policy, but does he believe somebody ought to be punished?There in lies the fundamental problem with the Bush approach - they authorized torture. Doing so becomes reason for others to join the terrorists. So, as to if the information gained was useful, there is no real way to measure how harmful it was, but it makes perfect sense how harmful it was to us, our way of life, and the very fabric of our Constitutional foundation.
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think that determination is going to be left up to, as I've said for any number of days looking backward on this now, that that's going to be made by a legal official.
Q And that legal official is the Attorney General?
MR. GIBBS: In our Constitution it is.
Q And what about this idea of the Attorney General appointing a special prosecutor?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I addressed this --
Q Is that his -- is that the Attorney General's decision or is that ultimately the President's decision?
MR. GIBBS: I'd have to look up, honestly, the legal statute to determine that. I don't -- I don't think the -- I don't believe that there's -- I think the Justice Department is fully capable of weighing the law.
Q You don't think a special prosecutor is necessary?
MR. GIBBS: I don't -- I don't think anybody has presented a compelling case why the Justice Department couldn't do this.
Q And then one final thing on this. Did Vice President Cheney make a specific request -- is it an official request that he wants these other memos declassified as far as you guys know?
MR. GIBBS: I would have to double-check with CIA. I think that the -- that request -- as I understand, what the Vice President has said, a request came to -- several weeks ago to the CIA. I don't -- but I have not talked to him.
Q Given that General Jones apparently was involved with helping to expedite with Jay Rockefeller, does that mean you guys will have a role in deciding whether this gets declassified or not?
MR. GIBBS: I believe so. I mean, I believe that --
Q It will come to your desk, it just hasn't happened yet?
MR. GIBBS: I think that's the case. I mean, I think declassification happens here.
Q Okay.
MR. GIBBS: Yes, sir.
Q Do you know if President Obama has read these memos to which Vice President Cheney is referring that showed that the enhanced interrogation techniques saved lives and didn't make America less safe, as you just said?
MR. GIBBS: I don't know if he -- I don't know if he has read the specific memos that Vice President Cheney may be referring to. But, Mark, let me broaden your question a bit. And I think you would get this from virtually every intelligence official who objectively looked at this, and that is that the efficacy of this is in many ways ambiguous, that whatever information -- I think people will tell you that there was information that was procured that was helpful, and information that was procured that was made up. Nobody could ever likely tell you that any information derived couldn't also have been derived from another mean.
But as I've said, and the President have said, what the -- if you look at the totality of the impact of this on our national security, building off of what I told Ed, our team, and many others outside of our team, have weighed in on the notion that the cost and the benefit of this -- that the benefit is greatly outweighed by the cost to our national security.
There are things that this country doesn't do. That's part of the criteria that the President used to -- on the -- in the very beginning of this administration outlaw these techniques from being used. The existence of and the use of these techniques became a recruitment tool and a rallying cry for terrorists all over the globe. And, as I mentioned, it makes it harder to -- the use of these techniques makes it harder to protect our own troops, and that that is the -- those are the reasons in total why this makes our country less safe.
Q You also said that -- you also said that the intelligence that was derived that Cheney is talking about could have been derived from another means. You said that to Chuck.I would have to agree with the President here, at some point, the ends do not justify the means and they may actually do more harm than good.
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think it is -- what is unknowable is whether that could be derived. I mean, again, that is -- part of this whole process is when you decide to do something it's -- you can't then go back and decide if the same action could have happened as a result of something else. That's why I think that whatever question is discussed here, it's -- I'd go back to my answer that I gave to Mark, which is that all of this is bigger than one certain amount or one smaller question, because you have to take into account the totality of our security -- whether or not the use of and the existence of certain techniques become a rallying cry and a recruitment tool for those that seek to do us harm each day. And that the -- there are things that this country does do and certain things this country doesn't do, and that this President has determined that we are going to -- we can protect the security of our country and our people and uphold our values and not have those two conflict.
MR. GIBBS: The best way to determine -- the best way to determine who's going to -- the rule of law is to have it determined by lawyers who can determine whether or not somebody knowingly broke the law.Very interesting. I think we see that there is a very good reason certain members of the W, Rove and Co are squawking more than others. They don't want to go to jail for doing what what they believe was right, even if in the end, it was indeed wrong and illegal.
Q We've started talking in the last 24 hours more and more about very high-ranking people -
MR. GIBBS: I haven't talked about --
Q -- Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney --
MR. GIBBS: -- you guys have.
Q If in fact it reaches that level, would the President weigh in?
MR. GIBBS: Okay, you guys and Jay Rockefeller. (Laughter.)
I'm sorry, what was --
Q Would the President weigh in --
MR. GIBBS: Now, that we've --
Q -- turn to very high-ranking levels of the government? What does he think, for example, of the fact that Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon? Was that a breach of the presidential duty, or should that have been left to the Attorney General?
MR. GIBBS: I think the President has seen Frost/Nixon, but I do not know whether he's determined the efficacy of such a pardon.
Thanks, guys.
A former Bush White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, said if a probe is opened up, "Barack Obama will regret this as one of the worst moments of his presidency, because it will set off a multi-year, extraordinarily divisive, all-consuming Washington scandal/controversy and everyone will end up looking bad."I would suggest the American people have a stronger stomach than many of the republicans believe, and we actually can handle the truth, and indeed will prosper for having known the full extent of the damage. I say let the investigations begin. The reason why Rove et. al. protest to much is that they know they have crossed the line for no aparrent gain, but to the detriment of the very Constitutional fabric of our great nation. The only way to fix this is to clean the stench by washing the stains out of our flag with the swift, blind and full application of justice.
Los Angeles school district officials moved forward Tuesday with plans to lay off more than 5,000 teachers, counselors, custodians, clerks and other employees, but the battle over funding will rage on for weeks -- affecting who goes, who stays and what schools and classrooms will look like for students next year.Bottom line, kids will be injured by this move.
“We wanted more ‘Dumbo’ and less ‘Star Wars,’”Shan't we all make this our slogan for Monday?
$5.2 million in just the last of his two years at one of the world’s largest funds, according to financial records released Friday by the White House.Oh, my. Should a man who has made a bundle in a hedge fund gambit be the top Econ adviser to Obama?
Impressive as that might sound, it is all the more considering that Mr. Summers worked there just one day a week.
Unlike most hedge funds, which lost money as the markets plunged in 2008, Shaw posted returns of about 7 percent in its so-called macroeconomic fund.Seems a little spurious. But then again, Summers, who knows how the system works, may be the best one to craft regulations to secure the system as he knows how they can cheat the system to win.
"I'm OK with urinals," said Chessy. "It's just another kind of toilet. It makes things easier for boys, and boys need all the help they can get."
“Washington is all in a tizzy over who’s at fault,” Mr. Obama said. “Some say it’s the Democrats’ fault, the Republicans’ fault. Listen, I’ll take responsibility. I’m the president.”Even if GWB uttered these words, he and his crack team of propagandists were so good at deflecting responsibility and blame that W's words were not trustworthy. Moreover, we knew W's words were empty based on his follow through and lack of action.
