Gillespie vs Gibbs: Obama's Economic Policies & Job Creation

Romney adviser: Obama's policies are "hostile to job creators"

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's senior adviser Ed Gillespie said on "Face the Nation" that President Obama's policies are "hostile to private investment and job creators."

"That's why we have been at eight percent unemployment or higher for the past 39 months," Gillespie said. "That is why there are 23 million Americans today who are either unemployed or underemployed or left the work force entirely, and why millions of people have lost their home and ended up in food stamps and poverty, because this president is hostile to job creators."

President Obama's senior adviser Robert Gibbs had a different take on the president's record, pointing to "25 consecutive months of private sector job growth."

Gibbs added: "We are certainly happy to talk a little bit about Mitt Romney and his record of not creating jobs in virtually every step of his life."

He points to Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts. "We have seen this experiment in Massachusetts... and [he] took that state's job creation numbers to 47th in the country."

However, Gillespie defended Romney's gubernatorial record in the Bay State: "During his time as governor, the unemployment rate dropped from nearly six percent to 4.7 percent; there was net job creation of about 40,000 jobs."

Last July, FactCheck.org looked into these claims and reported that Romney's job creation numbers grew slower than the national average.



Gibbs: Bain is Romney's "thesis" for president, calls attacks fair

On "Face the Nation," President Obama's senior campaign adviser Robert Gibbs defended the campaign's attacks on Bain Capital, the private equity firm Mitt Romney co-founded and led for more than a decade.

"That is what Mitt Romney is running on," Gibbs hold host Bob Schieffer. "This is a criticism and a good criticism, quite honestly, of Mitt Romney's only thesis for being president of the United States . . . and I think the American people and voters deserve to understand what Mitt Romney means when he says he has the keys to being the economic savior."

The Obama campaign makes the argument that Romney's role at the private equity firm, whose main role is to make money for investors, is not equivalent to creating jobs. To drive home the point, the campaign released two ads in the past two weeks hitting Romney's record at Bain, pointing to two companies - Ampad and GST Steel - that laid-off workers after Bain Capital acquired them.

Host Bob Schieffer queried Gibbs about the tenor of the campaign: "Whatever happened to hope and change?" he asked.

"Bob, there is going to be a choice in this election," Gibbs responded, saying that people will have a "visceral reaction" to Romney's Bain record.

Gibbs added that the Obama campaign is "certainly happy to talk a little bit about Mitt Romney and his record of not creating jobs in virtually every step of his life."

Gibbs also used Ronald Reagan's famous campaign query to voters. "That is what this campaign is going to be about . . . 'Who are you going to be better off with over the next four years?'" Gibbs said. "I don't think there is any doubt that when this election is said and done it will be close. But people of this country will reject the sort of speculation-type economic gains that Mitt Romney is quite good at for himself and for his investors, and instead look for an economy that is growing, that is built to last, that continues the job creation that we have seen and not quite frankly return to the failed policies of the past."

Also on the program, Ed Gillespie, senior adviser to Mitt Romney, responded to Gibbs' attacks.

"There is correlation, Bob, between making money and growing a company and job creation. That is what President Obama doesn't understand, because he never has been in the private sector and doesn't really understand how it works. I think that is why his policies are so hostile to job creation," Gillespie said.

Gillespie pointed to Solyndra, a government-backed green-energy company that went bankrupt after receiving a government subsidy.

"That is their view of the world [that] we would be better off with political appointees deciding to put our taxpayer money at risk, and reward campaign donors, as was the case in Solyndra, [rather than to put private capital at risk," Gillespie said.


View Larger Map


Sources: CBS News, Google Maps

Voters Angry Over GOP Anonymous Foreign Donations: Decision 2010

Poll: Nearly Half Bothered By Anonymous Donations


A new Poll suggests that the new attacks by Democrats against Republicans over the use of anonymous donations may be registering with voters.

President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and other top officials at the Democratic National Committee over the past week have criticized independent organizations for raising and spending big bucks this election cycle in support of Republican candidates and causes, without disclosing some of their donors.

The organizations, and other top Republicans have fired back, saying the Democrats accusations are baseless and that campaign finance laws allow for the identity of some donors to be kept secret, if the groups are set up as tax-exempt non-profit organizations.

A Bloomberg National Poll indicates that 47 percent of Americans say they would be less likely to support a particular candidate if his or her campaign was aided by advertising paid for by anonymous business groups, with nine percent saying they would be more likely to back such a candidate and 41 percent saying that it would not matter.

Many of the groups are using the money they raise to pay for television commercials and get out the vote efforts, supplementing efforts already underway by the Republican party and the individual campaigns. Money by groups supporting Republicans greatly outnumbers cash by such organizations backing Democrats this election cycle.

The groups are structured as a tax-exempt "social welfare" 501(c)(4) organizations. As part of its tax exempt status, the organizations are allowed to both raise unlimited amounts of money and keep the names and organizations of their contributors secret – an allowance that facilitates groups of this type to raise considerably more money than standard so-called 527 groups which have to report their donors.

The Bloomberg national poll was conducted October 7-10, with 721 likely voters across the country questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error for likely voters is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.


Sources: Bloomberg.com, CNN, Fox News

Pres. Obama Addresses Nation On BP Oil Spill; What To Expect

Robert Gibbs Previews Obama's Address To The Nation


With a good majority of Americans saying he's not being tough enough on BP, President Obama is doing something he's never done before tonight – addressing the nation from the Oval Office. To give us an idea of what we can expect, we were joined by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Tuesday's American Morning.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Google Maps

"Jews Should Get the Hell Out of Palestine", Helen Thomas Resigns (Video)

Helen Thomas Retires Amid Controversy Over Israel Remarks



Veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas announced Monday that she is retiring, effective immediately, in the wake of a controversy over her comments on Israel, according to a report from her employer, Hearst News Service.

Thomas told a rabbi at a White House event last week that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and go back to Germany and Poland.

"I deeply regret my comments I made last week regarding the Israelis and the Palestinians," Thomas said in a statement on her Web site. "They do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon."

Thomas's comments provoked sharp criticism within the close-knit world of White House reporters, and drew a rebuke from the White House podium Monday. With her seat conspicuously empty at the daily briefing, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs assailed Thomas for her words.

"Those remarks were offensive and reprehensible," Gibbs said, noting that Thomas has apologized. Her sentiments "do not reflect certainly most of the people here and certainly not those of the administration."

Thomas, 89, who has covered the White House for decades, canceled a speech over the weekend and was dropped by a speakers' bureau that represented her. The controversy comes at a precarious moment in the Middle East, after an Israeli assault on an aid flotilla that left 11 dead and prompted an international outcry.

The Board of the White House Correspondents Association also issued a statement Monday calling her comment "indefensible."

The full WHCA statement follows:

Helen Thomas' comments were indefensible and the White House Correspondents Association board firmly dissociates itself from them. Many in our profession who have known Helen for years were saddened by the comments, which were especially unfortunate in light of her role as a trail blazer on the White House beat.

While Helen has not been a member of the WHCA for many years, her special status in the briefing room has helped solidify her as the dean of the White House press corps so we feel the need to speak out strongly on this matter.

We want to emphasize that the role of the WHCA is to represent the White House press corps in its dealings with the White House on coverage-related issues. We do not police the speech of our members or colleagues. We are not involved at all in issuing White House credentials, that is the purview of the White House itself.

But the incident does revive the issue of whether it is appropriate for an opinion columnist to have a front row seat in the WH briefing room. That is an issue under the jurisdiction of this board. We are actively seeking input from our association members on this important matter, and we have scheduled a special meeting of the WHCA board on Thursday to decide on the seating issue.


Sources: Washington Post, Youtube

Joe Biden Drops The "F" Word During Health Care Signing Ceremony

Joe Biden: "This Is A Big .... Deal"


It sounds like Vice President Joe Biden dropped the "f-bomb" at the health care reform signing ceremony Tuesday.

On video captured by network cameras and reviewed by POLITICO, Biden can be heard whispering to the president: "This is a big f---ing deal."

The audio isn't flawless. But a canvass of reporters from several news organizations who also reviewed the tape produced a consensus that Biden did, indeed, go there.

And in a Twitter message just before 1 p.m., White House press secretary Robert Gibbs appeared to acknowledge the hot-mic moment, writing: " And yes Mr. Vice President, you're right..."

The crack puts Biden in rarified company: On "60 Minutes" last Sunday, profanity-prone White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said that he's only cussed in the Oval Office around Obama once, and that he tries to keep his verbiage clean in the presence of the president whenever possible.

A call to Biden's spokesman wasn't immediately returned.


Sources: Whitehouse.gov, TMZ, Fox News, Politico, NY Post, Youtube

Valerie Jarrett & Obama's "Team Chicago" Responsible For 12 Failures

American Voters want Pres. Barack Obama to begin leading our country NOT his staff.

This includes Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers and Robert Gibbs.

We understand Pres. Obama has to work with his staff, however the problem has been him allowing them to lead.

What's the problem you ask?

Neither Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers nor Robert Gibbs were elected President of the United States.

In addition with the exception of Robert Gibbs, Voters don't believe Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers have their best interest at heart.

In fact here are 12 failures Obama's "Chicago Politics" team are responsible for:


1) A Failed Health Care Reform Bill and No Transparency.

2) High National Unemployment numbers including too many Minorities being the first fired.

3) AIG Bailout Cover-up

4) Propping up Wall Street with Taxpayer money

5) No Lending from Big Banks to Small Businesses.

6) A Poor Performing, Failing Public School System

7) Stimulus Money being used by Governors as "Thank You" gifts and to balance State Budgets versus Job Creation.

8) Banks receiving kickbacks for Student Loans and Students still experiencing great difficulty securing Federal Aid to continue their Education. (North Carolina, Virginia).

Why are so many Minority Student Financial Aid applications being flagged for Verification? This needs to be investigated.

9) Too many Black and Hispanic Men serving Life Terms in Prison for Non-Homocidal, Non-Drug Related crimes.

10) Too many Hispanics being deported for small offenses. Ex: Traffic Tickets, Speeding, etc.,

11) A Failed Olympics 2016 Bid.

12) A Disturbingly Partisan, Divided Congress.


Such a large number of FAILURES means Pres. Obama can NO longer afford to depend upon his "Chicago Politics" staff to speak for him or "help" lead our nation.

For the record Voters don't care about their Harvard resumes.

We just don't want these individuals whom we don't trust running our country.

Last but certainly not least, most Voters still believe some heads need to roll.

Hire some outsiders than perhaps we'll be satisfied.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

View Larger Map


Sources: MSNBC, Google Maps

MSNBC's Ed Schultz Curses At Robert Gibbs, "He's Full Of S__!"

Ed Schultz curses Robert Gibbs: "Full of Sh*t"


MSNBC host Ed Schultz is tearing into Robert Gibbs and the rest of President Barack Obama’s team, telling the White House press secretary that he is “full of sh—.”

Speaking at the progressive Blue State Bash event at the Minneapolis Convention Center on Saturday, Schultz relayed a combative exchange he had off the air with Gibbs, who last appeared on his program “The Ed Show” on Thursday.

“I know it’s being recorded, but I wasn’t told it was off the record,” Schultz said in a video posted on theuptake.org

"Mr. Gibbs and I had quite the conversation off the air the other night. I’m gonna tell ya, I told him he was full of sh—."

“I did,” Schultz continued. “And then he gave me the Dick Cheney f-bomb the same way Sen. Leahy got it on the Senate floor. I told Robert Gibbs, I said: ‘And I’m sorry you’re swearing at me, but I’m just trying to help you out. I’m telling you you’re losing your base. Do you understand you’re losing your base?’”

Schultz set a fiery tone in the nearly 20-minute speech that eviscerated the Democratic Party for not listening to its progressive wing.

“We have to get these people who have infiltrated the Democratic progressive movement and get them the hell out,” Schultz boomed. “We are still in an ideological fight for this country.”

The liberal talk show host — who was asked by North Dakota Democrats to run for the Senate seat vacated by Sen. Byron Dorgan’s retirement — implored the audience to hold the Obama administration’s feet to the fire.

“We have to make sure President Obama gets the message: We’re with you, but you have to be with us,” he said. “If we don’t speak up and tell the White House they’re wrong right now, who will do it?”

Schultz also said that despite turning down an opportunity to run for the Senate, he would have used the same aggressive tone on the campaign trail.

“I want all of you to know that I am not running for the United States Senate,” he said. “But I also want you to know that if I did, I’d kick their ass.”

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.


Sources: Politico, Uptake.org, Youtube

Obama Admin. Staff Seems Unfazed By Brown's Win...Arrogance

Sources: MSNBC, The Daily Beast, Zimbio

Obama Halts Yemen Transfers; Re-opens Yemen's U.S. Embassy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

No Yemen Transfers "Right Now"


President Barack Obama does not plan to transfer additional detainees to Yemen "right now," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Tuesday — a stance that could complicate Obama’s efforts to close the U.S.-run Guantanamo Bay prison for terror suspects.

Nationals from Yemen make up nearly half of the remaining 198 prisoners at Guantanamo. Gibbs acknowledged that the decision not to send any more of them home soon could mean that an added number of them will have to be transferred to a new prison for former Guantanamo detainees that the administration hopes to set up in Thomson, Ill. There was never a plan to transfer the Yemenis as a block back to Yemen, White House aides said.

"While we remain committed to closing the facility, the determination has been made that right now any additional transfers to Yemen is not a good idea," Gibbs said. "We would not move additional people into Yemen."

The suspension is for the foreseeable future, as long as the current situation remains, the aides said.

Obama has said the Christmas Day bombing plot was hatched in Yemen, an extremist haven on the Arabian Peninsula. The U.S. Embassy there closed Sunday and Monday because of a terrorist threat. The suspect in the attack, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, has reportedly told the FBI that he crafted the plot with Al Qaeda operatives in Yemen. In addition, the Al Qaeda branch there claimed responsibility for the attack.

A senior administration official said: "The president created the [Guantanamo] Task Force to conduct the thorough work that had not been done before: to review the relevant information about each detainee on an individual basis, including the threat they pose, to determine whether they should be prosecuted, detained or transferred. That review resulted in different recommendations for the Yemeni detainees."

The administration has sent mixed signals on the issue in recent days. During appearances on Sunday television talk shows, White House counterterrorism and homeland security adviser John Brennan brushed aside questions about a halt to repatriations to Yemen.

“We haven't, you know, stopped the process as far as dealing with them," Brennan said on CNN's "State of the Union." "Many of them are going to be prosecuted, some under the Article III courts, and some under — in military courts. Some of these individuals are going to be transferred back to Yemen at the right time and the right pace and in the right way."

"We are looking at it every day," Brennan said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "We're not going to make any decisions that are going to put people at risk. We will decide and determine when we should send additional people back."

Last month, the Obama administration sent six Guantanamo prisoners home to Yemen. However, that was prior to the attempted Christmas Day bombing.

While Republicans have long been critical of Obama for transferring prisoners to Yemen, the issue became more politically problematic for the White House last week when key Democrats like Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) called for a stop to such repatriations. Thompson also said members of Congress were likely to have objections to bringing the detainees to the U.S.

A total of seven prisoners have been returned to Yemen since Obama took office last January. Under President George W. Bush, 13 men were sent from Guantanamo to Yemen.

Last week, administration officials speaking on condition of anonymity told news outlets, including POLITICO, that no more prisoners would be sent to Yemen in the coming months. One official told The New York Times that such a decision was actually made weeks ago, before the Christmas Day bombing attempt. It was not clear why Brennan seemed unwilling to repeat those statements during his TV interviews Sunday.

While Republicans and some security analysts have expressed skepticism about Yemen’s ability to keep returning Guantanamo prisoners out of trouble, Brennan has said that the U.S. worked closely with Yemen’s government to obtain such assurances for the men returned last year.





U.S. Embassy In Yemen Re-opens


The U.S. Embassy in Sana'a, Yemen, has re-opened, two days after it was shut out of concern for terrorism threats, Reuters reports:

The U.S. embassy in Yemen re-opened on Tuesday, an embassy official said, a day after Yemeni forces killed two al Qaeda militants they said were behind a threat that forced U.S. and European missions to close.

"We are reopened," a U.S. embassy official said. The embassy had closed on Sunday in response to what it said were threats from al Qaeda. Washington says the group is trying to use Yemen as a base for attacks far beyond the region. ....

A number of western embassies closed their doors this week due to security fears. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said fighting in Yemen was a threat to regional and global stability.

The British and French embassies resumed operations on Tuesday but remained closed to the public, diplomats at those missions said.

Yemeni forces killed at least two al Qaeda militants on Monday they said were behind the threat that forced the foreign embassies to close, and President Ali Abdullah Saleh said Yemen was "ready to confront and defeat anyone thinking of harming the country and its security."




View Larger Map


Sources: AP, Politico, MSNBC, Reuters, NY Times, Google Maps

Obama Admin. Too Complacent On Important Issues?...Déjà Vu

Handling Problems The Obama Way


There is a sense of déjà vu in the Obama administration’s response to the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day. A by-now familiar pattern has been established for dealing with unexpected problems.

First, White House aides downplay the notion that something may have gone wrong on their part. While staying out of the spotlight, the president conveys his efforts to address the situation and his feelings about it through administration officials. After a few days, the White House concedes on the issue, and perhaps Obama even steps out to address it.

That same scenario unfolded over the summer when Obama said Sgt. James Crowley, a white Cambridge, Mass., police officer, “acted stupidly” when he arrested Henry Louis Gates Jr., a black Harvard professor, in his own home. It happened in March when the public was outraged over AIG dishing out hefty bonuses. More recently the public witnessed the dynamic after a security breach at President Barack Obama’s first state dinner.

But the fact that the issue now is a terrorist incident - albeit an unsuccessful one - makes the stakes much higher, and the White House’s usual approach more questionable. That this test of his leadership comes while he’s on vacation in tropical Hawaii further complicates things.

After delivering his first public remarks Monday about a Nigerian man’s attempt to blow up a Northwest Airlines jetliner over Detroit, the president motorcaded over to the golf course at a nearby country club. Optics aside, it had taken Obama three days to issue a statement on the incident, and the administration was left struggling to get control of the message.

By the time Obama addressed the public with a brief televised statement, his critics had made such headway that the White House was left with this lede in the New York Times: “President Obama emerged from Hawaiian seclusion on Monday to try to quell gathering criticism of his administration’s handling of the thwarted Christmas Day bombing of an American airliner as a branch of Al Qaeda claimed responsibility.”

It’s the kind of story the White House might have avoided if Obama hadn’t waited so long to forcefully react to the incident.

Critics on the right have predictably seized on his response as a sign of weak leadership. After Obama spoke Monday, Benjamin Friedman, a research fellow for defense and homeland security at the Cato Institute, said his remarks did not do a great job of calming the public.

“He didn’t try that hard,” Friedman said. “He just made that comment that we ought to be confident, but he didn’t really go into much detail about why we ought to be confident.”

But Obama’s aides say that a measured approach is Obama’s style. The president has said as much himself. When asked at a news conference in March why it took him days to respond to the AIG bonuses, Obama snapped: “It took us a couple of days because I like to know what I’m talking about before I speak – alright?”

Over the past few days that reticence created a vacuum his critics were only to happy to fill. As Obama let thing play out, Republicans slammed him for not addressing Americans about the situation and Congress called for hearings on the matter.

The White House released updates on how he was monitoring the situation, as well as background guidance to reporters to help shape the narrative. Obama’s chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, was already scheduled to be on Sunday news shows, and National Security Council chief of staff Denis McDonough said it was Obama’s idea to also dispatch his Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to explain what was going on.

But Napolitano and Gibbs seemed to both be carrying a message that the White House quickly backed off of Monday morning - that “the system worked.”

Gibbs said on CBS’s Face the Nation that “in many ways, this system has worked.” Napolitano also said “the system worked.” But by Monday morning she was on NBC’s Today show explaining that her words had been taken out of context and that she was referring to what happened after the incident occurred. “Our system did not work in this instance,” she explained clearly.

The comments of Gibbs and Napolitano – whether planned or unplanned – did not come off as being slips of the tongue, such as when Vice President Joe Biden advised Americans against traveling on airlines after the swine flu outbreak, and Gibbs later cleaned up the message by explaining what Biden meant to say.

The decision for Obama to leave the talking to his aides in the aftermath of the attempted terrorist attack was not “standard operating procedure,” McDonough said after Obama’s statement Monday.

“We thought it made sense for him to handle it in that way and then we thought today was a good opportunity for the president to go out there,” McDonough said. “We don’t really have a standard operating procedure for when is best to go out.”

The White House pushed back against criticism that the president was not properly engaged.

McDonough told reporters that Obama is getting at least half a dozen briefings a day – a morning briefing with administration officials about the Northwest Airlines incident and five paper briefings, two from the National Counter Terrorism Center and three from the Situation Room.

“The President has been very engaged on this, has been leading our response effort, asking agencies to take a variety of steps including all the steps he outlined today,” McDonough said. “He recognizes that it’s very important that we communicate to the American people what we know and the steps that we’re taking.”

Without naming names, the White House also put blame at the feet of the departed Bush administration even as Obama’s speech-to-golf-course moment Monday conjured up memories of President George W. Bush on a golf course angrily decrying recent suicide bombings in Israel, and capping off his remarks with, "Thank you. Now watch this drive."

“Obviously the procedures and the protocols employed in this instance are ones that we’ve inherited that had been built over the course of several years since 2003,” McDonough said. His comments echoed Obama, who pointed out that the review he ordered of the government’s terrorist watch-list procedures is of a system that “our government has had in place for many years.”

“In general, I think that the president’s inclinations as a leader work fairly well for this issue — no-drama Obama,” Friedman said. “In some ways Al Qaeda is trying to be relevant and trying to be politically relevant, and in some sense they achieved that. He’s denying them that relevance by acting like it’s not the number-one thing on his agenda. We credit them with more power and credibility than they have.”

Obama heading to the golf course, Friedman said, “signals that it’s not a crisis, and he’s the president and he has a lot of things to do and this is just one of them.”

There are times when the Obama White House has responded swiftly. When Somali Pirates captured and American captain, the president appeared engaged from the start. After the Air Force One flyover that brought back memories of 9/11 throughout Manhattan, the White House quickly apologized and Obama’s aides informed reporters that he was furious when he learned about it.

But other times the administration seems to have a tin ear.

The White House refused to accept any responsibility for the security breach at last month's state dinner – allowing the Secret Service to accept complete fault – even after it became clear that Obama’s social secretary Desiree Rogers had nixed a practice to have an East Wing staffer with Secret Service verifying names off of a guest list. Only after mounting pressure did the White House quietly order an internal review and reinstate that procedure.

And for days, as controversy over Obama’s “acted stupidly” remark about the Cambridge police officer continued to swirl, the White House downplayed its significance. Indeed on the Friday after he uttered it, Gibbs still defended Obama’s remark and told reporters in his office that they had heard the last from the president on the issue. But a few hours later, Obama interrupted Gibbs during his daily briefing and stepped to his podium to apologize for his remarks and offer up the now famous “beer summit.”

Obama will continue to monitor the aftermath of the Northwest incident with close advisers and top aides. But Americans probably won’t see more of Obama at a podium speaking about the issue again this week as he continues to balance his family vacation with his duties as commander-in-chief.

McDonough left reportrers with the impression that if the public sees Obama again in Hawaii he’ll likely be heading to the golf course or the beach. “We haven’t really talked through when he’ll go out, but you guys – I’m sure you’ll see him,” McDonough said half-jokingly.



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, Google Maps

Obama Responds To Detroit Plane Al-Qaida Terrorist Attack From Hawaii

Watch CBS News Videos Online




Obama Addresses Airline Security In Low-Key Fashion



President Obama has performed a difficult but familiar balancing act over the past few days: ordering new security measures in the wake of an attempted airliner attack without excessively alarming the public -- or triggering an outcry from civil liberties advocates.

He has done so almost entirely out of sight. On vacation in Hawaii, tucked away in a lush neighborhood where his family is renting a waterfront home, Obama dispatched surrogates back in Washington -- chiefly Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano and press secretary Robert Gibbs, who appeared on the Sunday talk shows -- to reassure the public and explain his approach.

Yet even as the president avoided cameras and played golf and basketball over the weekend, his aides were quick to explain how fully Obama minded the aftermath of the Detroit case. He was briefed shortly after 6 a.m. on Sunday about the latest developments in the Christmas Day incident, aides said. After another airplane security breach occurred three hours later, his advisers quickly issued a statement on his behalf, even though that episode turned out to be a misunderstanding.

For Obama, who campaigned on a promise of restoring respect for individual rights and shifting away from the Bush-era "war on terror," the struggle between security and freedom is defining his presidency much as it did his predecessor's. Three of his most important national security speeches -- one at the National Archives in the spring, one announcing a troop increase in Afghanistan and one accepting the Nobel Peace prize on Dec. 10 -- addressed the need for a reasonable balance between competing goals.

After the attempted terrorist act, Obama sought answers to questions about the suspect and asked for new security steps at airports, White House officials said. But he did not ask to raise the nation's threat level -- and, in fact, left the decision entirely to Napolitano, senior officials said. Nor did he rush to address the public on camera, though he is likely to do so in the next few days, an official said.

Obama did not directly bring up the subject of protecting civil liberties in the aftermath of the Christmas Day case, a senior adviser said. If he calibrated his message, it was by allowing others to toe the national security line for the first few days. "It's not that the president sat back and thought, 'How do I find the middle course?' " an official said on Sunday. "The president was presented with the facts and said, 'What are the steps we need to take to protect the American people and make sure they understand all the requisite steps are indeed being taken and implemented?' "

The middle road is not without peril, as the president and his advisers have discovered. Throughout his first year in office, Obama disappointed liberals in his party with a series of policies -- from his failure to close the Guantanamo Bay military facility to his retention of the Bush policies of indefinite detention of prisoners and military commissions. But with other moves, such as trying the accused Sept. 11 plotters in federal court and opening a domestic detainee facility in Illinois, Obama has made good on civil-liberties-related campaign pledges -- provoking conservative ire.

That was the case on Sunday, when Michigan's Peter Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that the Obama administration should be held accountable for the near-catastrophe aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. Hoekstra said that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's presence on the flight was part of a pattern of administration neglect on preparedness questions, stemming from a failure to recognize essential dangers. "The threat to the United States is real. I think this administration has downplayed it," he said on Fox News.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) called for the administration to tip further in the direction of security, even if it comes at the expense of some individual rights. "We do need the full-body scan, especially when you have countries like Nigeria, which have inadequate security to begin with; then you have passengers transiting in Amsterdam and coming here," he said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

But Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), chair of the intelligence subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee, said this weekend that the administration has to be cautious. "Civil liberties matter, and we must stay mindful that an overreaction has the potential to overwhelm the system and fail to make us more safe," she said in an interview.

Many of the new security measures are not being announced, and the administration's decision to review its various watch lists does not appear to have set off alarm bells. "I think it is too early to draw any conclusions -- and I hope there is no short-term, knee-jerk reaction," said Tom Parker, policy director for terrorism, counterterrorism and human rights at Amnesty International.

Obama is used to explaining policy himself. But so far in Hawaii, the Christmas Day incident has not required a presidential appearance or Obama's rhetorical skills.

Instead, after going to the gym and playing basketball with a small group -- including friends and staff -- Obama took his family and friends to a Marine Corps base beach that had been closed for the presidential entourage.

His aides noted another important balance Obama is trying to strike: between work and play, his job as president and his family, his public profile and a personal retreat that has been almost completely private for four full days.



View Larger Map


Sources: Washington Post, Politico, Huffington Post, Fox News, MSNBC, Google Maps

Where's The Elegant Ms. Desiree Rogers Now?

Desiree Rogers: The New White House Wallflower


As 50,000 people attend 28 White House Christmas parties, glamorous social secretary Desiree Rogers is on the sidelines. Sandra McElwaine on the new security policies—and how her ex-husband is trying to help.

Desiree Rogers will no longer be swanning about at White House parties. Au contraire. Ever since the glamorous social secretary was hobnobbing with celebrities, oblivious to two reality-TV wannabes who were crashing the Obamas’ first State Dinner in November she has been given a timeout.

Even though her Louboutin stilettos still click down the historic hallways of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, there have been no more appearances in designer gowns or pronouncements about pushing the unique Obama brand. Instead, the sophisticated Harvard MBA seems to be adapting to a more formal protocol and attempting to play a more traditional behind-the-scenes role as she oversees the care and feeding of more than 50,000 guests at 28 different holiday receptions.

Being on the sidelines is not a familiar place for the 50-year-old Rogers. The descendant of a Louisiana voodoo priestess, she has always been a star with a penchant for publicity.

Once married to a powerful hedge-fund manager, John Rogers—they remain close friends (“John is very shy, Desiree is always out front,” says a friend)—Desiree Rogers was a leading member of Chicago's business and philanthropic world. It was Rogers who introduced the Obamas to the social elite, not the other way around. (She also helped raise $200,000 for his Presidential campaign.)

“She’s a big deal in politics and the community and so well connected Obama can’t fire her,” says a well-placed Chicagoan. “I’m surprised she took this job. I didn’t know she wanted to work this hard.”

Until Desiree Rogers, White House social secretaries were considered worker bees who stayed in the shadows compiling lists, organizing events and seating charts, and averting last-minute disasters, but the high-flying business executive had no intention of playing an inconspicuous or subservient role.

From the moment she arrived, she quickly broke the mold by flaunting her upscale lifestyle and interests, sometimes outshining her boss, posing for Vogue and other glossies, and announcing a totally new agenda for the social office. “You have to think about [The Social Secretary Job], in my mind, almost like a business,” she told The Wall Street Journal in April. “Otherwise, you never get there. You get caught in linen hell and flower hell, list hell.”

Her outspokenness did not endear Rogers to the elite clique of former social secretaries. Many inside the Beltway felt she was too wedded to the Obamas’ inner circle, known as the Chicago Mafia, and much like others in new administrations, she seemed reluctant to leave her cocoon in order to learn the ways of the capital.

“They realized she never had a clue how to plan a State Dinner,” says one Washington socialite. “This is such a different environment from Chicago. You simply can’t do what you did there.”

According to one recent party goer, a visibly chastened Rogers has now had to tone down her glitzy image: “She’s out there looking like a working stiff, a fashionable one, but not dolled up like before.”

Since the Salahis incident at the State Dinner—when the Secret Service assumed responsibility for the security breach while Rogers stayed silent—there are new regulations and protocols in place at the White House.

All guests must now run a lengthy official gauntlet before entering the Presidential mansion. For starters, there are two checkpoints manned by a representative of the administration and a Secret Service officer. Next, attendees will now be asked to provide a photo ID at two other checkpoints, while aides swirl around to deter any unexpected visitors.

Finally, at the East Colonnade, guests are now greeted by Rogers, sporting a chic black suit, a standard White House identification badge around her neck, a clipboard in hand. ”Welcome to the White House on behalf of the Obamas,” she says with a dazzling smile.

Despite the new policies, there was already a kerfuffle over invitations to two of the White House press parties last week. Apparently, the invitations went out late and the White House did not issue them by name.

Rather, they sent a batch to the manager of each bureau, who doled them out to whomever they wanted. As such, a number of reporters who cover the White House for leading newspapers and other news organizations were never included. This latest misstep was blamed on press secretary Robert Gibbs, but many in Washington blame Rogers.

Another recent flap involved the White House receiving line. The Obamas decided not to shake hands and pose for pictures with every guest at every party, as their predecessors had done. Being denied a prized photo op has created considerable angst among a number of invitees—including Dee Dee Myers, President Clinton’s former press secretary, who observed: “I totally understand that doing a receiving line is exhausting, yet people have come to expect it. It means a lot to them.”

Rumors abound about plans to resurrect Rogers' reputation. Will she stay on for a grace period and then be reassigned as ambassador to some neutral country like Switzerland or Luxembourg? "Once you put yourself out there the way she has, it’s hard to come back in,” observes a friend.

Even her ex-husband has been talking to an eclectic mix of journalists about the best way to revive her fortunes. One concept under consideration: orchestrating a humorous mea culpa as Nancy Reagan did at one of the annual Gridiron Dinners.

Known for her extravagant taste and fancy outfits, the former first lady donned oversize rubber boots and a seriously frumpy dress and waltzed out on the stage singing “Second Hand Clothes” to the tune of “Second Hand Rose.” Her performance brought down the house and all was forgiven.

Might this ploy this work for the troubled social secretary? After all, Washington is a city of redemption.

Speech writer and humorist Landon Parvin, who wrote those lyrics for Nancy Reagan, doubts that frivolity will solve her problem. “She can’t get out of it with a one-liner," he says. “What she needs to redeem herself is not humor but the truth. She should admit her mistake and tell us exactly what happened. The sooner the better.”


View Larger Map


Sources: The Daily Beast, C-Span, Bitten & Bound, American Urban Radio Networks, Google Maps

Robert Gibbs Argues With Chinese Press

It was media mayhem in Copenhagen Friday. The Chinese press reportedly flooded a meeting between President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, with many of Robert Gibbs' "people" left in the dust.








Chinese block U.S. reporters from event


U.S. Officials and Journalists attempting to enter the room where President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao were planning to meet in Copenhagen were caught in a chaotic scene that left nearly the entire U.S. press pool outside, and reportedly nearly prevented White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and National Security Council Chief of Staff Denis McDonough from entering.

Gibbs attempted to gain access for American reporters after Chinese cameramen pushed into the room, and Chinese security behind then blocked the entrance to U.S. media attending the event.

Told "no photo" and "no press," Gibbs responded: "Hold on. Hold. I've got to get my American guys in because everybody else got in…. My guys have to get just like your guys got in. This is a joint meeting, and my guys get in or we're leaving. …"

One photographer was able to gain access to the room. No U.S. television or print reporters were allowed in to cover the event.



View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, The Daily Beast, Google Maps

Gallup Report Chief Defends Polling Results On Pres. Obama...Its True

The Value of Daily Tracking


It’s not unusual for politicians to react to polls. I’ve certainly seen it many times over the years, particularly when elected representatives or candidates are confronted with poll results they don’t like.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked Tuesday about Gallup Daily poll results showing a drop in President Obama’s job approval rating. According to news reports, Gibbs responded with some critical remarks and unusual analogies.

I’m certain Gibbs didn’t intend to impugn the value of presidential job approval polls in general. It appears he was reacting more to the fact that the president’s approval numbers are not stable, but, in fact, in a period of some change. More specifically, Gibbs was reacting to our report Monday highlighting the fact that, while there was a short-term positive uptick in Obama’s job approval ratings after his Afghanistan speech last week, his ratings through the weekend fell back.

But this type of movement is the nature of the beast. Gibbs said that if Gallup were his EKG, he would visit his doctor. Well, I think the doctor might ask him what’s going on in his life that would cause his EKG to be fluctuating so much. There is, in fact, a lot going on at the moment -- the healthcare bill, the jobs summit, the Copenhagen Climate Conference, and Afghanistan.

We live in a representative democracy. Our politicians are accountable to the people. Certainly the accountability that matters most is on Election Day. But keeping tabs on the people’s views of their elected representatives between elections is vitally important – and something in which the people of the country are demonstrably interested. We at Gallup are fortunate to have the capability to interview random samples of Americans on a daily basis. This helps us closely monitor the ways in which presidential actions are being received by the national constituency.

Of course, it's not just Gallup that finds this important. I’m sure the White House was just as interested as we were in how the president’s major speech at West Point last week played to the American public. Our tracking helped provide the answer.

Obama is set to travel to Oslo, Norway, to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The White House is probably just as interested as we are in how the American public is going to react to this event. Our tracking will give us the answer -- both in the short-term and in the long-term. (And I’m sure the Obama campaign in 2008 paid a great deal of attention to their own tracking polls measuring how his candidacy was doing as the events of the campaign rocketed across the news each day.)

The foundation of the tracking poll is state-of-the-art, sound scientific sampling methodology, as is the same with all of our Gallup polling. Gallup reports presidential job approval using a three-day rolling average. Users are, of course, free to make whatever use they would like of the daily tracking information. The same pertains to their use of daily stock market reports, daily Nielsen ratings of television shows, or any other frequent measure.

For those interested in trends over a longer period than the three-day average reported daily, Gallup aggregates job approval on a weekly basis and reports weekly demographic breakouts.





Doing the Math on Obama's Job Approval Rating


A couple of readers have asked about the math in my colleague Jeff Jones' recent analysis of race differences in President Obama's job approval rating. In the story, Jeff points out that Obama's overall approval rating is 49%, while his approval among whites is 39% and among nonwhites is 73%.

The readers have apparently taken the sample sizes for whites and nonwhites given in the "Survey Methods" box at the end of story, multiplied these Ns by the group's respective approval ratings and calculated an average. The results give an average approval rating lower than the actual 49%.

The sample sizes given at the end of the article are the actual unweighted Ns for each group. The reported results, as is the case for almost all national polls done by Gallup and others, are based on weighted results, which take into account sampling variations as compared to U.S. census estimates. Because nonwhites are usually underrepresented in national samples, the final results weighted by U.S. census parameters will give the nonwhites a higher weighted representation and the whites a lower weighted representation. The weighted N for whites is 2,606, and for nonwhites 1,014. Doing the math on these weighted Ns yields the 49% overall approval rating.




Pres. Obama's Approval Slide Finds Whites Down to 39%


Obama last week fell below 50% approval in Gallup Daily tracking for the first time in his presidency, both in daily three-day rolling averages and in Gallup Daily tracking results aggregated weekly.

In his first full week in office (Jan. 26-Feb. 1), an average of 66% of Americans approved of the job Obama was doing, including 61% of non-Hispanic whites and 80% of nonwhites. In the most recent week, spanning Nov. 16-22 interviewing, his approval rating averaged 49% overall, 39% among whites, and 73% among nonwhites. Thus, since the beginning of his presidency, his support has dropped 22 points among whites, compared with a 7-point loss among nonwhites.

Given the 17-point drop in his approval rating among all U.S. adults, it follows that Obama's support has declined among all major demographic and attitudinal subgroups, with one notable exception -- blacks.

Blacks' support for Obama has averaged 93% during his time in office, and has been at or above 90% nearly every week during his presidency. Thus, part of the reason Obama's support among nonwhites has not dropped as much as his support among other groups is because of his consistent support from blacks. (With Hispanics' approval rating down five points, greater declines among Asians, Native Americans, and those of mixed races account for his total seven-point drop among nonwhites.)

The accompanying table shows how Obama's approval rating has changed by subgroup from his first full week in office to the most recent week. The only subgroup showing a greater change than whites is Republicans, down 24 points during this time. Independents' approval of Obama has declined nearly as much (down 18 points), whereas support among Democrats is down only 6 points.

Obama's strongest support comes from blacks, Democrats, and liberals -- all of whom give him approval ratings above 80%. He maintains solid support of more than 60% from nonwhites, Hispanics, and young adults.

A Closer Look at Race and Party

One reason Obama may have maintained support among blacks is their overwhelming affiliation with the Democratic Party. This is not a sufficient explanation, though, because Obama's approval rating has dropped among Democrats even as it has held steady among blacks.

In fact, it appears as though Obama's relatively small loss in support among Democrats has come exclusively from white Democrats. In late January/early February, Obama averaged 87% approval among white Democrats and 90% approval among nonwhite Democrats. Now, his approval rating among white Democrats is 76%, down 11 points, but is essentially the same (if not a little higher) at 92% among nonwhite Democrats.

Bottom Line

Obama won the Democratic nomination and the presidency with strong support from blacks and other racial minorities. In fact, according to exit polls and Gallup's final pre-election estimates, he won the election despite losing by double digits to John McCain among white voters.

Those patterns of support seem to have persisted into his presidency, with his support among whites starting out lower and dropping faster than his support among nonwhites. And though he maintains widespread loyalty among Democrats, the small loss in support he has seen from his fellow partisans seems to be exclusively from white Democrats.

It is important to note that this pattern is not unique to Obama. For example, Bill Clinton averaged 55% job approval during his presidency, including 52% among whites but a much higher 76% among nonwhites and 82% among blacks.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 3,611 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Nov. 16-22, 2009, as part of Gallup Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 2,879 non-Hispanic whites, the maximum margin of error is ±2 percentage points.

For results based on the sample of 732 nonwhites, the maximum margin of error is ±5 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones and cellular phones.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.


Sources: Gallup Report, Gallup.com