Meet the Press: Meet the Candidates series, with Tim Russert
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Jeffrey Goldberg, “Obama on Zionism and Hamas,” , at sexygf.info obama_on_ Press, “Obama criticizes McCain, Bush on appeasement talk,” May 16, , Senator Barack Obama, transcript from Meet the Press, MSNBC, May 4, Oct 26, On Meet the Press, Brokaw noted that McCain had blasted Bush in a recent interview. sexygf.info . All Mccain saying is tax credits, tax breaks,Obama is some kind of. Jun 15, Russert's most important quote, Obama to deliver major fatherhood speech and McCain to address oil execs. MSNBC runs “Meet the Press” CLASSICS from 2 to 6 p.m., then again at 9. McCAIN TODAY: will meet at John McCain headquarters with Iraqi Foreign . Playbook - POLITICO Archive.
Jackie Robinson, the first man to break the racial barrier in Major League Baseball, also becomes the first athlete to appear on "Meet the Press. Here she talks about her trip to the Soviet Union. Indeed, it can be said that he is the poet of all mankind. Castro was annoyed that permanent panelist and producer Lawrence Spivak would not allow him to smoke cigars in the studio.
Civil Rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Kennedy October 16, After this interview, then-Senator John F.
Kennedy calls Meet the Press the nation's "fifty-first state. After the interview, Hoffa was furious about being asked whether his insistence on dealing only in cash and keeping few records gave the appearance of impropriety. The potential Senate candidate was coached by his older brother, President John F. On the day of the program, President Kennedy delayed his departure from Palm Beach in order to watch the show, but later told his brother that he was almost too nervous to watch.
Ronald Reagan, making his first bid for public office, appears on "Meet the Press" with his Democratic opponent for the governorship of California, the incumbent Gov. They say, as they have repeatedly, "We've been doing the best we can. Oh, well, my assessment is different, our intelligence assessments are different, our military commanders' assessments are different. The fact is, is that if you've got training camps in Pakistani territory where these folks are operating with--without any worry that they are going to be broken up or that strikes are going to take place--we know where these folks are.
You know, I was--I would talk to commanders and, and U. We have provided significant amounts of military aid, but much of it has been conventional military aid that is used by Pakistan because they're worried about India or they're involved in disputes about Kashmir. And the point that I've made is, is that if we are going to provide military assistance to Pakistan, we should at least expect that that money is effectively deployed to deal with what is the most important security threat that we face.
That only makes sense. On the other hand, we've also got to make sure that we're reaching out to the Pakistani government and helping them to provide a better life for their people. I'm sure you heard the same thing that I have heard every time I've gone to Pakistan.
Got about million people there. The estimates are as many as 50 percent of them are sympathetic to the terrorists. If the United States makes a unilateral attack, it'll set off a conflagration within Pakistan. That's part of the reason that Musharraf played it the way that he did. Well, look, there's no doubt that the situation in Pakistan is, is complicated. I think it was made more complicated by our insistence on providing Musharraf with a lot of military aid, ignoring some of the problems in terms of his anti-democratic practices, and ignoring the fact that the Taliban and al-Qaeda was resurgent in that area.
If we are reaching out to the Pakistanis and working with them not only about our security interests, but also about the well-being of the Pakistani people. If we are encouraging democratic practices and human rights and making sure that Supreme Court justices are not kicked off the bench because they're not providing rulings that are of the liking to the military, that will gain more support for our policies in the region and in Pakistan, and hopefully will give more political space for them to act forcefully against the extremists in the region.
Let's move on to Israel, where you got very good notices across the political spectrum from Israeli leaders, but you also met with King Abdullah of Jordan. He recently told The Washington Post, and he's been saying in--this in the United States, as well; when asked if Iran is the number one threat of the region, he said, no, "I think the lack of peace [between Israel and the Palestinians] is the major threat.
I don't see the ability of creating a two-state solution beyond I think this is really the last chance. If this fails, I think this is going to be a major threat for the Middle East: That's our major challenge, I'm very concerned that the clock is ticking, that the door is closing on all of us.
Did you tell him that you would appoint a presidential envoy who would report only to you to work exclusively on the issues of peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis?
I told him something approximating that. What I told him was that this will be an issue that I don't wait until the last minute to work on, that I want to pick up on some of the progress that has been made coming out of Annapolis.
I give the Bush administration credit that the Annapolis process has gotten Prime Minister Olmert in Israel and President Abbas in the Palestinian territories to have very serious and frank discussions.
I think they have moved the ball forward. They may not be able to finish the job. They certainly can't finish it without serious participation by the next administration, and we've got to start early. Advertise And, and one thing I want to pick up on, because I think King, King Abdullah is as savvy a analyst of the region and player in the region as, as there is, one of the points that he made and I think a lot of people made, is that we've got to have an overarching strategy recognizing that all these issues are connected.
It will also weaken Iran, which has been using Hamas and Hezbollah as a way to stir up mischief in the region. So we've got to take all these issues, and I think the next president has to start very quickly in moving both on the peace process forward and still recognizing that issues like Iran are connected and of extraordinary priority.
You met with a wide variety of Israelis; you only met with Palestinian President Abbas. But you went to an Israeli village that had been shelled.
You went to the Holocaust museum. Any number of people have commented on the fact that you really didn't spend any time with Palestinian businessmen or go to a Palestinian family that lost a child to Israeli gunfire. You didn't even get a falafel in east Jerusalem while you were there. Can't you see why anytime an American goes to the Middle East, goes to an Arab capital, on the street or in a corridors of power, they say, "You just do whatever the Israelis want you to do, and the politicians come out here looking for Jewish votes.
Well, I, I, I don't think that's entirely fair. This is my second trip to Israel and the West Bank. And the first time that I went, I did meet with Palestinian businessmen, I did talk to Palestinian students in Ramallah.
When you're in a region for a day, you've got a lot of boxes that you've got to check. And in Israel in particular, a big chunk of our day was meeting with not only the current prime minister, but former prime ministers and a whole bunch of people who intend to be prime minister. And the--it was important for us to make sure that we had covered our bases there. But the, the larger point I think to be made is this. That the Palestinian people are having a very tough time right now economically, and it is in U.
I think it's in Israelis' interest as well. And what I've said is that we're going to make sure that the Palestinians have the--a state that allows them to prosper as long as we also have certainty that Israel's security is not being compromised. I think it's in the interest of both parties, but we are the critical ingredient in terms of making sure that a deal actually gets done.
You were a rock star, as you often are when you give a speech. You had some, by estimates,people listening to you. Not everyone in America was an admirer. Charles Krauthammer, the conservative columnist said, "He hasn't earned the right to speak there. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan went to Berlin, their rhetoric soared, but their optimism was grounded in the reality of politics, conflict and hard choices. Kennedy didn't dream of the universal brotherhood of man.
He drew lines that reflected hard realities.
Reagan didn't call for a kumbaya moment. He cited tough policies that sparked harsh political disagreements. We should help Palestinians and Israelis unite. We should unite to prevent genocide in Darfur. We should unite so the Iranians won't develop nukes. What Obama offered in Berlin flowed right out of that mind-set. It will take politics and power to address those challenges, the two factors that dare not speak their name in Obama's lofty peroration.
Obama has benefited form a week of good images. But substantively, optimism without reality isn't eloquence. Well, let me, let, let You're a candidate for president of the United States. Let me say first of all, there were a bunch of really good reviews that you didn't, you didn't put up on the screen.
I'd, I'd say there were about nine good reviews for every, every bad one. And number two, I think David Brooks is one of my favorite conservatives, but he is a conservative who is supportive of John McCain, so let's, you know, put that out there as, as a caveat. But get to the point. But, but, but, but let's, let's get to the point.
No one speech does everything, right?
I could have delivered a exhaustive list of policy prescriptions. I suspect thatpeople would have slowly drifted off as I entered into the 45th minute of the speech. What I was trying to do was provide some broad themes in terms of where America needs to go and where Europe needs to go. And contrary to David Brooks' suggestion and some of the suggestions of other conservatives, I was, I think, pretty clear about the, the difficulties of, of power and of politics.
When I specifically said that Europeans need to step up and do more in Afghanistan, that wasn't an applause line in Germany. When I talked about the fact that they need to do more in Iraq despite our past differences, that wasn't an applause line in Germany. When I talked about the fact that there has been too much anti-American sentiment and a, and a stereotyping of America in Europe, that wasn't an applause line in Germany, that wasn't a bunch of high-flying rhetoric.
'Meet the Press' transcript for Sept. 7, 2008
So I, I think that, given the purpose that I had, which is to get Europeans to recognize the extraordinary sacrifices that Americans have made on behalf of world freedom and security and to get Americans to recognize we need partners in order to be effective to solve our problems, I would give myself a, a slightly better grade than David Brooks did.
Senator, we're going to give you a chance to make some real news here in a moment. You can talk about the vice presidential choices that may be on your mind. But we'll have a brief break first, and we'll be back to continue our discussion with Senator Obama, talk about his vice presidential choices, the economy, and also race in America.
I'll have more from London with Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama after this brief station break. And wherever you are, Senator, as you know, all politics is local. Vice presidential candidates, tantalizing to everyone. Recent poll said that, by a factor of about 60 percent, the American people believe that John McCain should have a vice presidential running mate who is strong on the economy.
Think it's fair to say that conventional political wisdom in this country is that you need a vice presidential candidate who has very good national security credentials.
Is that your number one criteria? You know, I hate to do this to you, Tom, but I made a pledge that the next time you heard me talk about vice president it would be to introduce my vice presidential running mate. So here's what I'll tell you: I'm going to want somebody with integrity; I'm going to want somebody with independence, who's willing to tell me where he thinks or she thinks I'm wrong; and I'm, I'm going to want somebody who shares a vision of the country where we need to go, that we've got to fundamentally change not only our policies, but how our politics works, how business is done in Washington.
And I think that there are a number of great candidates out there. I'll be selecting one soon enough, and, and I'm sure NBC will be reporting on it. Are you going to break the old rules? The old rules have been you pick a vice presidential candidate because you need electoral strength in some region and you need somebody who is stronger in some policy area than you are.
Meet the Press - Wikipedia
I, I think the most important thing from my perspective is somebody who can help me govern. I want somebody who I'm compatible with, who I can work with, who has a shared vision, who certainly complements me in the sense that they provide a knowledge base or an area of, of expertise that can be useful.
Because we're going to have a lot of problems and a lot of work to do, and I'm not interested in a vice president who I just send off to go to funerals. I want somebody who's going to be able to roll up their sleeves and really do some work. Mike Murphy, who you know is a political consultant primarily for Republicans, is now working with NBC as an analyst, said on this broadcast two weeks ago something very interesting. He said, "Republican Party always has trouble when the Democrats put on the ticket a Southern white male Protestant.
Will that be a factor in your consideration? Tom, you can fish as much as you want. You're not going to get it out of me.
July Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) - Meet the Press | NBC News
Well, let me--you, you had a conversation with a prominent Hillary fundraiser that got reported in the Los Angeles Times, in which she asked you--she's still a fan of, of Hillary, and she said And is she on your list?
I think Hillary Clinton--I've said--this one I can actually answer, because I've said consistently that I think Hillary Clinton would be on anybody's short list. She, she is one of the most effective, intelligent, courageous leaders that we have in the Democratic Party.
And according to the woman that you were talking to, you said that "we just don't know what to do about Bill," or something to that effect. Oh, you know, I maybe--I think that a lot of conversations get characterized. I think that not only do I want Hillary Clinton campaigning with me, I want Bill Clinton, one of the smartest men in the history of politics, involved in our campaign. But I'm not going to, I'm not going to spill the beans here.
You, you can, you can do what you want Bill Clinton as, Bill Clinton as a surrogate for you day in and day out, throughout the campaign? I, I would love to have Bill Clinton campaigning for me. I--he was very effective when it came to our primary, you know. He was traveling to little towns in Texas and Ohio, and it was very hard to keep up, given that he was campaigning so hard at the same time as Hillary was campaigning as hard as she was.
We continue to hear that timing, obviously, will be a factor. It's no secret that next week the Olympics begin. And then America's attention will--we hope, at NBC--will be consumed by the Olympics, as it traditionally happens every four years. And then right after that, the Democrats have their convention.
Are you going to wait until the convention? You know, we will make the announcement when we make the announcement. Let, let me, let me just--and not to dodge, because I've already dodged enough. I think what's going to be on people's minds over the next week is going to be what's been on their minds for the last four weeks, and that is And so one of the things that I'll be doing on Monday, I'm going to be pulling together some of my core economic advisers--Paul Volcker, the former Fed chairman; Warren Buffet; Paul Schmidt--Eric Schmidt, the chairman of Google; Bob Rubin; Larry Summers; a host of people--Bob Reich--to come together and examine the policies that we've already put forward--a middle class tax cut, a second round of stimulus, a effort to shore up the housing market in addition to the bill that was already passed through Congress, what we need to do in terms of energy and infrastructure.
I think that that is what is driving people all across the country right now is worries and concerns about inability to pay the gas bill, inability to buy food because prices have gone up so high. And the failures of the economy, despite the fact that we grew for seven years, to provide rising levels of income and wages for the American people, I think, indicates the degree to which we've got to fundamentally shift how we approach economic policy.
Let me ask you a question about housing. A lot of attention this past week to federal aid for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government quasi-agencies that got themselves in real trouble.
Banks have gotten in trouble. There's now a housing bill out there to take care of people whose homes are being foreclosed. This is not as cold-blooded as it sounds, but I hear a lot of people around this country saying, "Look, I did the right thing.
Or the lenders who were taking the fees and doing loans that they knew that would not be being paid back and walking away? Why should the hard-working taxpayer in this kind of an economy have to bail those people out?
They shouldn't, which is why a couple of points that I've made. Any assistance to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac should not be focused on the investors and the shareholders. It should not be focused on management. It should be focused on making sure that we've got liquidity in the housing market. And there are ways of making sure that we are not giving a windfall to investors who were enjoying the upside all these years of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, extremely profitable partly because there was this implied federal guarantee.
Well, if they enjoyed all that upside, they should enjoy some downside as well. Why not just reconstitute them as pure government agencies and take them out of the private sector? So there are, there are a host of complicated issues here. It is true that there may be some folks who didn't make the best decision that will still benefit from the home foreclosure plans that have been put forward. But keep in mind that many of these folks were not so much speculators as they were probably in over their heads.
They tried to get more house than they could afford because they were told by these mortgage brokers that they could afford it. We are better off helping them stay in their home if you can fix the mortgage and let them pay it off over time than have them foreclose, in which not only do they lose their home, not only do the lenders lose a lot, but that community suddenly sees its property values going down. And what we need is a floor in the housing market, a, a stop to the decline in housing values, as well as some certainty on the part of lenders in terms of what houses are worth so that we can start restoring confidence in the housing market, but also confidence in the financial markets where credit has been contracting.
And that's affecting a lot of terrific businesses and good sound developments and entrepreneurial opportunities because they just can't get good credit. People are driving less now. In some states, there's an indication that maybe even traffic deaths are down. Well, I do not think that high gas prices are a good thing for American families. I mean, I've, I've met teachers who have quit their jobs because the school where they were teaching was just too far.
It was consuming too much of their income. I've met people who lost their job and couldn't go on a job search because they couldn't fill up the gas tank. Ordinary families are under extraordinary stress as a consequence of these high gas prices, so we need to do what we can to bring those prices down, but But there's no easy answer for that on a short term. The, the fact of the matter is that we should have, over the last 20 years, been planning for this day.
I have been an advocate for raising fuel efficiency standards for years, something that John McCain has opposed. Had we taken those steps, we would not be in the same situation that we're in right now, the fact that all the big three U. Had we worked with them to adjust and retool to adapt to this market, we would not be losing as many jobs as we're losing right now. That's, that's all hindsight. Going forward, what we have to do is we do have to continue to push to make cars much more fuel efficient, and I think that the direction of hybrid plug-ins, where we can get a hundred miles per gallon of gas because we've developed battery technology and created a new electricity grid, that can make a huge difference.
Industrial use of oil, we can change that. We have to have the same approach that John Kennedy said, "We're going to the moon in 10 years. Let me ask you about race. We have some recent polling on that, and, as you know, it's a whispered if not unspoken issue in your campaign.
When African-Americans were asked that question, they said yes, 78 percent to 20 percent. Racial justice in America was the second half of this question. Again, we asked this question of African-Americans. Is it biased against blacks? Sixty-seven percent to, no, 27 percent. Do you see those numbers the same way? You know, here's what I've said based on my life experience is that there have been profound changes since I was born, ' When I accepted the Democratic nomination, it will be the 40th anniversary of Dr.
King's "I have a dream" speech, and here I am in a position to accept the Democratic nomination. That, that is a profound change that we should celebrate. We've still got work to do. And there is no doubt that discrimination still exists in various parts of American life. There's no doubt that--I think, I think What about the margins that we saw in that poll? Well, I, I think that when you say it's widespread, people think of, "Well, I've, I've had an experience," and, and they maybe extrapolate all across this society.
I think that's a mistake.Dan Sullivan: 'A Lot Of Things The President Can Learn' From McCain - Meet The Press - NBC News
I think the vast majority of Americans are people of goodwill. They want to do the right thing.
'Meet the Press' transcript for July 27, 2008
The biggest problem that we have in terms of race relations, I think, is dealing with the legacy of past discrimination which has resulted in extreme disparities in terms of poverty, in terms of wealth and in terms of income. Our inner cities are a legacy of what happened in the past.
And the question is less assigning blame or rooting out active racism, because that's not the reason that those inner cities are in such bad shape, but rather figuring out are we willing to make the investments to deal with that past history so we can move forward to a brighter future?
And that involves investing in early childhood education, fixing the schools in those communities, being willing to work in terms of job retraining.